【摘要】：典當在我國有著悠久的歷史,縱觀歷史長河,典當業(yè)在我國經(jīng)歷了萌芽一發(fā)展—鼎盛—衰退—復(fù)興的歷史變遷。典當?shù)陌l(fā)展大致概括為：萌芽于兩漢時期,肇始于南朝佛寺,入俗于大唐五代,立行于南北兩宋,興盛于明清兩季,衰落于清末民初,復(fù)興于當代改革。新中國成立后,典當業(yè)曾一度消失,直至1987年,典當業(yè)重新復(fù)出,復(fù)興后的典當業(yè)伴隨著社會經(jīng)濟的發(fā)展而呈蓬勃向上之勢,但典當立法并沒有緊跟典當業(yè)發(fā)展的步伐,在民事法律體系日趨完備的今天,典當仍然游離于基本立法之外。在理論界,對典當基本理論的研究有所停滯,至今仍存在一些模糊認識,將典當?shù)韧诘錂?quán)、將典當權(quán)等同于營業(yè)質(zhì)權(quán)等；在立法上,規(guī)范典當?shù)氖巧虅?wù)部、公安部頒布的《典當管理辦法》(以下簡稱《辦法》),其位階較低；在司法實踐中,法官對進入訴訟領(lǐng)域的典當糾紛,從案由、合同性質(zhì)及效力認定乃至最終的審判結(jié)果存在不同意見；在政府管理層,對于典當企業(yè)的定位至今沒有主流觀點。理論上的分歧、立法上的不足、司法實踐中的困境、政府管理上的模糊在一定程度上阻礙了典當業(yè)的長遠發(fā)展。 本文第一部分從我國典當制度的歷史發(fā)展著手論述,通過分析,提出現(xiàn)代典當與傳統(tǒng)典當?shù)牟煌?并通過對比,簡單介紹現(xiàn)行《典當管理辦法》(以下簡稱《辦法》)的基本內(nèi)容,對典當行業(yè)現(xiàn)狀、社會作用及立法現(xiàn)狀進行基本的展現(xiàn)。第二部分對典當制度的基本理論問題進行探究,對典當?shù)膬?nèi)涵、典當?shù)幕痉申P(guān)系、典當?shù)幕咎攸c,典當權(quán)的性質(zhì)以及典當與相關(guān)法律概念進行辨析,在分析比較的基礎(chǔ)上,提出筆者的觀點,為下一步的改進作好鋪墊。第三部分筆者以在審判實踐中遇到的真實案件為例,闡述了典當制度在司法實踐中的困境,主要體現(xiàn)在：案由不統(tǒng)一、合同效力認定不統(tǒng)一、利息及綜合費用計算不統(tǒng)一、法律適用不統(tǒng)一等。第四部分重點對我國典當制度進行反思與完善,指出了典當法律制度方面存在的問題：我國在典當立法方面一直存在爭議,現(xiàn)行規(guī)范典當業(yè)的《辦法》法律位階較低,且與《合同法》、《擔(dān)保法》等主要法律之間存在沖突,《辦法》自身內(nèi)容部分過于籠統(tǒng),不具有可操作性等,在分析其不足的基礎(chǔ)上,提出了對我國典當法律制度進行完善的建議：一是以《物權(quán)法》修正案形式明確規(guī)定典當權(quán)；二是參考其它國家的做法,制定一部位階較高的典當商法；三是對典當立法的具體內(nèi)容進行了建議。 筆者深知,典當法律制度的完善決不是一朝一夕之功,由于筆者水平所限,對典當?shù)姆ɡ硖骄恳仓皇歉Q豹一斑,但筆者堅信,真理愈辨愈明,希望此文可以拋磚引玉,使更多的法學(xué)同行加入了典當?shù)难芯恐衼?使典當業(yè)的發(fā)展不再游離于立法體系之外。
[Abstract]:Pawnbroking has a long history in our country. The development of pawn is summarized as follows: sprouting in the Han Dynasty, beginning in the Buddhist temple of the Southern Dynasty, entering the customs in the Great Tang and five dynasties, standing in the two Song dynasties, flourishing in the Ming and Qing dynasties, declining in the late Qing Dynasty and the beginning of the Republic, and reviving the contemporary reform. After the founding of New China, pawnbroking disappeared for a time, until 1987, when pawnbroking came back again. With the development of social economy, the pawn business after renaissance took on a vigorous and upward trend, but the pawn legislation did not keep pace with the development of pawnbroking. In the civil law system is increasingly complete today, pawn is still free from the basic legislation. In the theoretical circle, the research on the basic theory of pawnshop has stagnated, and there are still some vague understandings, which equate pawn with pawn right, pawn right with business pledge right and so on. In legislation, the Ministry of Commerce, Ministry of Public Security promulgated the "pawn management measures" (hereinafter referred to as "measures"), its rank is lower; In judicial practice, judges have different opinions on pawn disputes in the field of litigation, such as the cause of the case, the nature and validity of the contract, and even the final result of the trial; in the management of the government, there is no mainstream view on the positioning of pawnbroking enterprises up to now. The differences in theory, the deficiency in legislation, the dilemma in judicial practice and the ambiguity in government management hinder the long-term development of pawnbroking to a certain extent. The first part of this paper begins with the historical development of pawn system in our country. Through analysis, it points out the differences between modern pawn and traditional pawn, and compares them with each other. This paper briefly introduces the basic contents of the current management method of pawn (hereinafter referred to as "the method"), and presents the present situation of pawn industry, social function and legislation. The second part explores the basic theoretical problems of pawn system, analyzes the connotation of pawn, the basic legal relationship of pawn, the basic characteristics of pawn, the nature of pawn right and the concept of pawn and related law. On the basis of analysis and comparison, this paper puts forward the author's point of view and paves the way for further improvement. In the third part, taking the real cases in trial practice as an example, the author expounds the dilemma of pawn system in judicial practice, which is mainly reflected in the disunity of the cause of the case, the inconsistency of the validity of the contract, the disunity of the calculation of interest and the comprehensive cost. The application of the law is not uniform, etc. The fourth part focuses on the reflection and improvement of the pawn system in China, pointing out the problems in the pawn legal system: there have been disputes in the legislation of pawn in our country, and the legal rank of the current regulation of pawnbroking is relatively low. And there are conflicts with the main laws, such as contract Law, guarantee Law, etc., the contents of which are too general and not operable, etc., on the basis of analyzing their shortcomings, Some suggestions are put forward to perfect the pawn legal system of our country. Firstly, the pawn right is clearly stipulated in the form of the amendment of Real right Law; The second is to draw up a high rank pawn law with reference to the practice of other countries, and the third is to make suggestions on the specific content of pawn legislation. The author is well aware that the perfection of the pawn legal system is by no means an overnight achievement. Due to the limitations of the author's level, the legal research on pawn is only a peep into the panorama, but the author firmly believes that the more the truth is distinguished, the more clear it is, and I hope this article can draw on the jade. So that more law professionals join the pawn research, so that the development of pawnbroking is no longer free from the legislative system.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：山東大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：D923

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前5條

1 張e，

本文編號：2394992