There are rising necessities to protect foreign investors from the damage caused by illegal operations of host country as with the rapidly increasing foreign investment. However, dispute of international investment agreement between host country and investor has certain particularity. The subject of such investment disputes is the state and the other is foreign private investor. Both parties have unequal legal status and the state often enjoys immunity. Meanwhile, such disputes are generally caused by the host government exercising foreign jurisdiction derived from national sovereignty. Host countries are generally unwilling or unable to tolerate interference by other countries in the exercise of their foreign jurisdiction or agree to the exercise of jurisdiction over such dispute by a third party over their sovereignty and generally adhere to the principle of exhaustion of local remedies. However, foreign investors and their home countries(mostly) some western developed countries tend to mistrust the host country or dispute settlement body, arbitrarily think the host country legal system is not sound, the bias in the host country government, no fair, fair ruling, so reluctant to domestic investment dispute settlement in accordance with the host country. Therefore, a new type of dispute settlement should be established, based on which The International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes(hereinafter known as ICSID) was set by World Bank in 1996 according to ICSID CONVENTION. ICSID is the first arbitration organization that aims to settle investment disputes between government and foreign private investors. After the establishment of ICSID, a large number of investment countries and host countries join in ICSID CONVENTION so as to protect domestic investors, and "Investor-State Dispute Settlement Mechanism(ISDS)” that includes investment dispute settlement between investors and home countries is signed between countries. China is no exception. To expand business and capital attraction and protect Chinese investors in foreign countries, China sign ISDS with other countries that includes dispute settlement between investors and host countries. Until 2019, in the 104 BIT that China have signed with other countries, 98 BIT includes ISDS, and 10 out of 16 FTA investment agreements include ISDS. However, as with the constantly deepening global investment, more and more problems and risks relevant to ISDS are found, especially in a large proportion of investment agreement that China sign with other countries, the relatively wide range and principle problems are found, which bring many problems in dispute settlement between investors and host countries. Recently there are 11 disputes that involve Chinese government or Chinese investors as participant, which brings new challenge for China in proper dispute settlement between investors and host countries. Moreover, under the background that China is itself a motherland for investors and host country for foreign investors, there is necessity to systematically study and analyze Chinese ISDS-relevant laws and regulations and agreement. To carry out comprehensive analysis on dispute settlement mechanism between Chinese investors and host country, the author selects the literature research method of linking theory with practice. The creation of this paper is that the author combines the actual situation that China is a motherland for investors and a host country for foreign investors with practice and each dispute settlement, and that a comprehensive analysis is carried out in ISDS-relevant domestic laws, including 《Foreign Investment Law》, 《Administrative Reconsideration Law》,《Administrative Procedure Law》, relevant agreement signed by China and Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan, and BIT and FTA investment agreement signed by China and other countries. Especially with the change of policies relevant to investment agreement, what is China's attitude towards the signed BIT and FTA investment agreement? A comprehensive analysis is demonstrated in this paper according to era and country. Meanwhile, the author introduces main elements relevant to ISDS and ISD remedy in investment agreement specifically. Furthermore, detailed suggestions are proposed to settle ISDS problems disclosed in cases involving Chinese government and China's foreign investors. Finally, some reasonable and practical suggestions are put forward for the settlement of investment disputes between Chinese investors and host countries, as well as the settlement of investment disputes between Korean investors and the governments of mainland China, Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan.