The justice system faces challenges when dealing with different opinions in a case, especially when there is a minority or dissenting opinion. This phenomenon is fascinating in the context of the Denden Verzet case, especially in case No.12/Pdt.Bth/2020/PN.Kla Jo.78/PDT/2020/PT.TJK. Therefore, this research aims to analyze the dissenting opinion in-depth in case No.12/Pdt.Bth/2020/PN.Kla Jo.78/PDT/2020/PT.TJK, to understand the decision in civil case No.12/Pdt.Bth/2020/PN.Kla who has a dissenting opinion and its impact on the legal decision. The type of research used is normative legal research, namely legal research regarding the actual application or implementation of normative provisions in every particular legal event in society. The type of research is descriptive, which is to explain or describe clearly and in detail regarding the clarity and implementation of a regulation. After conducting research, it was found that dissenting opinions can significantly impact civil case decisions. First of all, the existence of a dissenting opinion can raise doubts about the legal strength of the decision. The parties who lose the case can use the dissenting opinion as a basis for filing an appeal or cassation, arguing that the majority decision does not fully comply with applicable legal principles. This can prolong the legal process and increase legal uncertainty for the parties involved. This is evidenced by the change from the decision of the CourtCourt of First Instance to the decision of the Court of Appeal, where the legal considerations at the appellate level are the same as the thoughts of the Dissenting opinion of the judge of the Court of first instance because according to the High Court the Disputants have proven the arguments of their rebuttal in the main case, namely has fulfilled the requirements to be declared a correct Objector so that the objection in the leading case must be granted.