This chapter discusses the handling of severe criminal cases. Section 7.1 confirms the role of the county governor in initial responses, including autopsies, courtroom interrogations, and drafting penalty proposals, and highlights the similarities and differences in “guilty verdicts” concerning severe cases and “conclusion formation” concerning minor matters. Section 7.2 outlines various scenarios, from the submission of penalty proposals by the county governor to their approval by superiors or the emperor and the execution of penalties. The drafting of the punishment petition necessitates the citation of the Legal Code. The latter three sections consider the role of statutes and precedents in trials. Firstly, it is elucidated that traditional China’s Legal Code and precedents are established and used as guidelines designed to ensure the “uniformity” of penalties proposed by officials in an individualistic manner rather than the legal “foundation” for judgments. Subsequently, it is demonstrated that modern legal systems also have mechanisms to address the demand for uniformity of judgments. For the sake of the comparative history of court systems, it is argued that a dual framework of “judgment foundation” and “judgment uniformity” is necessary.