This should not be much different from the debate, mainly around your point of view to organize materials and evidence, of course, around the facts and evidence of the case.
The first part is mainly about the arguments, expounding your views: whether it constitutes a crime, what crime, the circumstances that cannot be lightened or mitigated, how to apply the law, and how to punish it, which are generally consistent with the indictment of the public prosecution agency.
The second part States the facts of the first part, mainly the evidence of the case, and refutes the other party's point of view. Similar to the debate between lawyers and prosecutors in court.
The third part: Free debate can best reflect legal cultivation, and we should grasp the arguments of the other party and the problems in the debate process to ask and refute.
The fourth part is a summary of your conclusion.
I suggest you have time to participate in the court debate of controversial cases.
Good luck.