本文選題：“兇宅”　切入點：民間習(xí)俗　出處：《大連海事大學(xué)》2015年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：進入二十一世紀以來,中國房地產(chǎn)業(yè)蓬勃發(fā)展,巨大的剛性市場需求推動了二手房的交易量的增長,促進了我國經(jīng)濟的發(fā)展,于此同時,也帶來了各種各樣的房屋買賣合同糾紛,“兇宅”買賣合同糾紛便油然而生。在理論方面,對于“兇宅”買賣合同的效力,在國內(nèi)并沒有形成統(tǒng)一意見,在這一問題上有一定研究的專家和學(xué)者,對此有不同的主張與看法。與此同時,從近幾年的司法實踐來看,對于“兇宅”買賣合同糾紛,在全國不同層級、地區(qū)的法院均先后出現(xiàn)多種不同的法律判決結(jié)果,出現(xiàn)了很多同案不同判的現(xiàn)象。第一部分,“兇宅”的界定。從“兇宅”的含義和忌諱“兇宅”的民間風(fēng)俗的識別兩方面展開論述。所謂“兇宅”,許多專家、學(xué)者給出了各不相同的定義,但其共性為主張“兇宅”的客觀性、恐懼性；關(guān)于忌諱“兇宅”的大眾心理,有人主張其為一種封建迷信,也有人主張其為一種流傳已久的民間習(xí)俗,本人贊同第二種觀點,認為忌諱“兇宅”是一種普遍存在的民間習(xí)俗,應(yīng)給與適當(dāng)?shù)淖鹬?不應(yīng)該被否定。第二部分,梳理目前我國關(guān)于“兇宅”買賣合同效力的幾種不同觀點。結(jié)合我國目前是在司法實踐中對“兇宅”買賣合同糾紛的不同判決情形,介紹關(guān)于“兇宅”買賣合同的無效論、有效論、以及可變更、可撤銷論。進而得出結(jié)論,影響“兇宅”買賣合同效力判定的關(guān)鍵性要素包括哪些內(nèi)容。第三部分,對“兇宅”買賣合同進行可變更、可撤銷的效力證成。將對“兇宅”買賣合同屬于欺詐類型合同進行論述,分別從“兇宅”出賣人隱瞞“兇宅”信息屬于欺詐行為、“兇宅”出賣人主觀存在欺詐故意、“兇宅”買受人因欺詐行為陷入錯誤認識,并且基于此做出購房行為,這幾方面著重進行論述,對“兇宅”買賣合同為可撤銷合同進行效力證成。試圖形成理論上的一致觀點,在今后關(guān)于“兇宅”買賣合同糾紛的司法實踐中,起到一定的指導(dǎo)作用。最后為了盡量避免出現(xiàn)、以及更好解決此類糾紛總結(jié)幾點建議。
[Abstract]:Since 21th century, China's real estate industry has been booming. The huge rigid market demand has promoted the growth of second-hand housing trading volume and the development of China's economy. At the same time, It has also brought all kinds of disputes over the contract of sale of houses, and the disputes over the contract of purchase and sale of "fierce houses" arise spontaneously. In theory, there has not been a unified opinion on the effectiveness of the contracts for the sale of "houses" in China. Experts and scholars who have studied this issue have different opinions and opinions on it. At the same time, judging from the judicial practice in recent years, there are different levels of disputes over the sale of "villas" in the country. District courts have all produced a variety of different legal decisions in succession. There have been many different judgments in the same case. The first part, the definition of "fierce house." it discusses the meaning of "fierce house" and the identification of folk customs of taboo "fierce house." the so-called "fierce house", many experts, Scholars have given different definitions, but their common features are the objectivity and fear of "villainy" and the popular psychology of taboo "villainy", which is advocated by some as a feudal superstition. It is also argued that it is a popular folk custom. I agree with the second view. I think that taboo "villainy" is a widespread folk custom that should be properly respected and should not be denied. Part two, Combing several different views on the validity of the contract of "fierce house" sale in our country at present. Combining with the different judgments on the dispute of the contract of purchase and sale of "fierce house" in judicial practice in our country at present, this paper introduces the theory of invalidity of the contract of purchase and sale of "fierce house". The theory of effectiveness, and the theory of revocability and revocability. Finally, the conclusion is drawn that what are the key elements to determine the effectiveness of the contract of sale and purchase of "mania". The third part is to change the contract of purchase and sale of "villager". Revocable validity certificate... Will discuss that the contract of sale and purchase of "villainy" belongs to the type of fraud contract, It is a fraud to conceal the information from the "villain" seller respectively. The "villain" seller has subjective fraud intention, and the "villain" buyer falls into a wrong understanding because of the fraudulent behavior, and makes the purchase behavior based on this. These aspects focus on discussing the validity of the contract of sale and purchase of "villainy" as a revocable contract, trying to form a consistent view in theory, and in the future judicial practice on the dispute over the contract of purchase and sale of the "villainy". Finally, in order to avoid as far as possible, and better resolution of such disputes summarized a few suggestions.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：大連海事大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號】：D923.6

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條

1 王衛(wèi)國;論合同無效制度[J];法學(xué)研究;1995年03期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 曹士平;論民俗習(xí)慣司法運用的可行性[D];蘇州大學(xué);2010年

，

本文編號：1577257