The court of second instance identifying the ecological restoration behavior during the appeal period as lenient sentencing circumstances is in line with the modern communication penalty theory on the legitimacy of penalty. But at the same time

it conflicts with the traditional function of the second instance procedure of criminal procedure to supervise and correct the first instance procedure

which in essence

is the conflict between social public interests and institutional interests. Based on the fact that social public interest is the basis for interest measurement

ecological legal interest has priority in value compared with traditional criminal procedure design. In judicial practice

we should establish a standardized sentencing mechanism in line with the value orientation of environmental justice based on the reasonable screening of environmental crimes and the hierarchical and stepped sentencing principle of ecological restoration effect

so as to realize the mutual incentive between ecological restoration and penalty discretion.