Regarding mediation, do the work of pre-litigation mediation, do the work after the case is filed, do the work before the case, do the work after the case, 3 times, 4 times, 5 times, and always want you to mediate and close the case. At this time, when the amount of mediation is significantly lower than the scope of their own claims or assumptions, many parties will think that the judge and the other party are together. Some parties even directly asked the judge why they wanted the two parties to mediate. Others directly said that the judge was unfair, which made it very embarrassing.
If the judge repeatedly persuades you to mediate, and takes the initiative to persuade you significantly more, then this basically means that if you do not accept, then the referee's favor for you will be significantly lower than the mediation for you, and even if you go to the referee, you will lose the case completely. So if you are in this situation, you should think more about whether to mediate and settle the case, rather than always thinking about the judge, and even if the judge is biased towards the other party, then you should also consider mediation, because your substantive problem is the degree to which the case is resolved.
Especially when you are a passive party such as the defendant or the appellee, you should pay more attention to the situation where the judge always advises you to mediate, and the number of times is significantly more than that of the other party. In fact, the judge basically doesn't speak too directly, such as your case, it's difficult for me to judge, I can't judge, I said you two better mediate, how good the mediation is, your evidence is insufficient, etc., you need to consider the extraneous meaning.