Abstract: The judgment of the Supreme Court's Guiding Case No.8 ignores the specific family situation in which the case occurred; it separates the “common adjustment” of the family law; the judgment result “may” conform to the “legal theory” of the company law but has the “reasonableness” of the family law; KAI LAI company is in the status quo of “anti-common sense” that has not been dismissed; it also weakens the guiding role of this case. This shows that family business dispute itself is attached to the mixture of civil and commercial attributes; however， the current trial path does not provide a complete explanation path but simply and mechanically splits the family law and the commercial law， ignoring the correlation between family relations and commercial disputes; it is undoubtedly a legal formalism that should be criticized. Whether it is from the characteristics of family commercial disputes or the company law， the company's family genes， “familism” cannot be ignored and should not be overlooked. To this end， for family commercial disputes， the analysis framework with familism as the core needs to be reconstructed and the application of internal statutes and mediation procedures need to be prioritized in the resolution strategy. At the same time， it pays attention to the protection of the commercial rights of “wife” to avoid the company becoming another battlefield for family members to suppress in disguise.

Key words: company, family, trial, familism