1. The judgment of the court should be based on facts and law. Although the agreement is not clear, considering the relevant provisions of the Contract Law and the significance of the agreed late payment fee, the late payment fee in this case cannot be without unit time. "Several Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Evidence in Civil Proceedings" clearly stipulates that judges should comprehensively and objectively examine evidence in accordance with legal procedures. Therefore, if the court decides according to 0.3% of the total amount, it will lose the proper meaning of the agreed late payment fee and violate the basic legal common sense.
2. The legislative spirit of our country is based on punishing evil and promoting good. The arrears in 2008 have not been paid until 20 1 1 year, which has caused losses to creditors in terms of rising prices. The court's decision is 0.3% of the total amount, which is obviously a connivance of malicious arrears and runs counter to the legislative spirit of our country.