The content of modern consumer protection law consists of private law and economic law as two different institutional paradigms. The differences in these two different institutional paradigms are mainly embodied in three aspects. The first is what the consumer protection law protects. In this regard, civil law paradigm thinks what it protects is the private interests embodied in private goods of consumers as specific victims. However, economic law paradigm argues that what it protects is the public interests reflected in trading order for goods. The second is by what the consumer protection law protects. Withal, in civil law paradigm, the attributes of protecting the objects determine the right as the best tool to protect the interests of consumers. But in economic law paradigm, the attribute of protecting the objects determines social responsibilities as the best tool to protect consumer interests. The third is how to protect in the consumer protection law. In this regard, civil law paradigm is based on afterwards liability rules dominated by the private, and realizes the protection mainly in accordance with the lawsuit prosecuted by individuals to obtain the relief. But economic law paradigm is based on the ex-ante regulation rules dominated by public law enforcement and realizes the protection mainly in accordance with rules formulated by the law enforcement agencies to prevent damages and accompanied by public interest litigation. Based on the sample of revised consumer protection law and two pieces of judicial interpretation issued by the Supreme People's Court and used to hear consumer dispute cases, this paper employs economic analytical methods to compare legal interests protected, protection modes, and achievement ways of these two protection paradigms, and elaborates the economics paradigms of understanding or explaining consumer protection law, to perfect the consumer protection law in the future and provide rational support for proper explanation of current new institutions.