【摘要】：審理反壟斷案件時(shí)，違反反壟斷法行為的私法效力判斷是個(gè)不可回避的問(wèn)題，但是我國(guó)《反壟斷法》對(duì)此并沒(méi)有作出明確的規(guī)定，因此只能借助于《民法通則》、《合同法》及其司法解釋來(lái)作為適用的依據(jù)和判斷的準(zhǔn)則。于是，民法中的強(qiáng)制規(guī)范成為了連接反壟斷法與私法的管道，具有使反壟斷法進(jìn)入私法領(lǐng)域的功能。然而民法的強(qiáng)制規(guī)范并非徒有其表的法律條文，認(rèn)定反壟斷法違法行為的私法效力也非援引民法規(guī)定就能得出結(jié)論的簡(jiǎn)單問(wèn)題。透過(guò)民法體系思維判斷違反反壟斷法行為的私法效力，必然涉及兩個(gè)不同思維的法體系如何相互支援、相互協(xié)作的問(wèn)題。申言之，認(rèn)定反壟斷違法行為時(shí)既要注意反壟斷法的特質(zhì)，如違法行為的違法程度、反壟斷法規(guī)范該行為的目的、市場(chǎng)客觀環(huán)境、交易安全及交易中第三人的利益等，也應(yīng)注意不破壞民法既有的邏輯和體系思維。 本文以?xún)蓜t大相徑庭的判決為楔子展開(kāi)討論，梳理出違反反壟斷法行為私法效力認(rèn)定中所面臨的沖突與爭(zhēng)議，進(jìn)而考察國(guó)內(nèi)外相關(guān)學(xué)說(shuō)，在此基礎(chǔ)上提煉出現(xiàn)有理論中違反反壟斷法行為私法效力認(rèn)定中所需考量的要素，即法律規(guī)范效力屬性要素和公序良俗要素。在現(xiàn)有理論的深入梳理及分析后，本文嘗試提出自己的理論主張，即“反壟斷規(guī)范目的解釋論”，此觀點(diǎn)調(diào)和了民法中認(rèn)定違法行為私法效力的現(xiàn)有理論與反壟斷法的特性之間的矛盾，，以規(guī)范目的解釋方法較好地解決了反壟斷違法行為效力認(rèn)定中出現(xiàn)的問(wèn)題。文章的最后是這一理論的具體展開(kāi)，即以此理論分析了我國(guó)反壟斷法的三大實(shí)體內(nèi)容，并對(duì)文章開(kāi)頭提到的壟斷協(xié)議案件做了回應(yīng)。 除引言和結(jié)論外，論文包括以下五部分內(nèi)容。 第一部為“違反反壟斷法行為私法效力的沖突與爭(zhēng)議”，通過(guò)我國(guó)臺(tái)灣地區(qū)“高等法院第九十一年度上更字第一00號(hào)民事判決”與“高等法院高雄分院九十一年度上易字第五0號(hào)民事判決”兩份判決的比對(duì)，引發(fā)違反反壟斷法行為私法判斷的問(wèn)題。 第二部為“違反反壟斷法行為私法效力判定的主要學(xué)說(shuō)”，整理和分析國(guó)內(nèi)外現(xiàn)有相關(guān)學(xué)說(shuō)，以此辨章學(xué)術(shù)、考鏡源流、解釋邏輯、評(píng)判得失、發(fā)掘沉淀、前瞻未來(lái)，使得反壟斷法私法效力判定能夠建立在既有底蘊(yùn)厚重源遠(yuǎn)流長(zhǎng)的私法邏輯和體系思維之上。 第三部為“違反反壟斷法行為私法效力評(píng)判要素辨析”，在第二部分的基礎(chǔ)之上進(jìn)一步整理違反反壟斷法行為私法效力評(píng)判要素，抽象出傳統(tǒng)理論中“法律規(guī)范效力屬性要素”、“公序良俗要素”兩個(gè)分析維度。 第四部為“違反反壟斷法行為私法效力評(píng)判框架重構(gòu)”，在現(xiàn)有理論的梳理及分析后，本文嘗試提出自己的理論主張和評(píng)判框架，以此調(diào)和民法中認(rèn)定違法行為私法效力的現(xiàn)有理論與顧慮反壟斷法的特性的矛盾，以規(guī)范目的解釋方法較好地解決了反壟斷違法行為效力認(rèn)定中出現(xiàn)的問(wèn)題。 第五部分為“違反反壟斷法行為私法效力的具體認(rèn)定”，此部分為反壟斷規(guī)范目的解釋論在反壟斷法實(shí)體法中具體展開(kāi)，通過(guò)類(lèi)型化的分析，得出反壟斷法三大實(shí)體內(nèi)容在私法認(rèn)定問(wèn)題的初步結(jié)論。
[Abstract]:In case of anti-monopoly case, it is an unavoidable problem to judge the validity of private law against the behavior of anti-monopoly law, but our country's" anti-monopoly law "does not make clear regulation, so it can only be adopted by the General Principles of People's Law>, and its judicial interpretation as applicable basis and judgment criteria. Therefore, the compulsory norms in civil law have become the pipeline linking anti-monopoly law and private law, which has the function of bringing anti-monopoly law into private law. However, the compulsory norms of civil law are not the legal provisions of the law, but the validity of the private law of the illegal act of the anti-monopoly law does not invoke the simple question which can be concluded in the civil law. To judge the effectiveness of private law in violation of anti-monopoly law through the thinking of civil law system, it is necessary to deal with the mutual support and cooperation of two different ways of thinking. In the case of anti-monopoly act, it is necessary to pay attention to the characteristics of the anti-monopoly law, such as the illegal degree of the illegal act, the purpose of the regulation of the anti-monopoly law, the objective environment of the market, the security of the transaction and the interests of the third party in the transaction, etc. Attention should also be paid to not destroying both the logic and the system thinking of the civil law. This paper discusses the conflict and the dispute in the determination of the validity of the private law of the anti-monopoly law, and then inspects the relevant domestic and foreign affairs. On the basis of this theory, there are some elements necessary to be considered in the determination of the validity of the private law of anti-monopoly law, that is, the effective attribute of legal norms and the public order. The article tries to put forward its own theory after thorough analysis and analysis of the existing theory. Zhang, namely" Anti-monopoly normative purpose solution "On the basis of this view, the contradiction between the existing theory and the characteristics of the anti-monopoly law is reconciled in the civil law, and the interpretation method of the normative purpose is better solved in the determination of the validity of the anti-monopoly law. The last part of the article is the concrete development of this theory, that is, this theory analyzes the contents of the three big entities of our country's anti-monopoly law, and did it to the monopoly agreement cases mentioned in the beginning of the article. Response. In addition to the introduction and conclusion, the paper includes the following Within five parts Volume 1: Private Law in violation of Anti-monopoly Law Conflict and Dispute of Effectiveness in that Taiwan area of Taiwan, the first 0 in the ninth year of the high court  0鍙鋒皯浜嬪垽鍐斥

本文編號(hào)：2261191

qikan