本文選題：以物抵債 + 諾成合同　； 參考：《華中師范大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：以物抵債是債務(wù)人以他種給付代替原定給付從而使原債歸于消滅的法律行為。當(dāng)前我國(guó)社會(huì)生活及司法實(shí)踐中存在大量以物抵債,由其引起的糾紛也為數(shù)不少,但我國(guó)法律卻對(duì)此缺乏相應(yīng)的規(guī)定,理論界也存有較大爭(zhēng)議,導(dǎo)致司法認(rèn)定不一,呈現(xiàn)同案不同判的現(xiàn)象,當(dāng)事人的正當(dāng)利益得不到保障。故應(yīng)對(duì)以物抵債制度進(jìn)行研究,探尋相應(yīng)的完善措施,使其能更好實(shí)現(xiàn)應(yīng)有的制度價(jià)值。本文除序言和結(jié)語(yǔ)外,一共分為四大部分。序言部分是對(duì)為何研究以物抵債的說(shuō)明。從當(dāng)前實(shí)踐中存在的問(wèn)題引出研究以物抵債具有十分重要的理論和現(xiàn)實(shí)意義,對(duì)學(xué)界關(guān)于以物抵債研究進(jìn)行了文獻(xiàn)綜述,展現(xiàn)了當(dāng)前我國(guó)以物抵債的研究現(xiàn)狀。第一部分探討了以物抵債的正當(dāng)性。主要從意思自治原則、法的效率價(jià)值和利益均衡理論三個(gè)方面進(jìn)行闡述,意思自治原則為以物抵債存在提供了理論基礎(chǔ),法的效率價(jià)值從經(jīng)濟(jì)效率增長(zhǎng)和社會(huì)效率獲得角度論述了以物抵債存在具有必要性,利益均衡理論體現(xiàn)了以物抵債有助于實(shí)現(xiàn)多方主體利益共贏。第二部分論述了以物抵債的法律定性。首先梳理了學(xué)界關(guān)于以物抵債的諸種學(xué)說(shuō),主要有實(shí)踐合同說(shuō)、諾成合同說(shuō)和處分行為說(shuō)三種主流觀點(diǎn)。其次對(duì)上述諸說(shuō)進(jìn)行評(píng)析,“實(shí)踐合同說(shuō)”將以物抵債與代物清償?shù)韧?實(shí)踐中對(duì)其援引代物清償?shù)南嚓P(guān)規(guī)定,“處分行為說(shuō)”不承認(rèn)以物抵債是一種契約關(guān)系,兩者均存在不合理之處。本文認(rèn)為,“諾成合同說(shuō)”將以物抵債認(rèn)定為一種契約關(guān)系,更符合現(xiàn)實(shí)和以物抵債的基本原理,該契約具有有因性、從屬性和無(wú)償性三個(gè)法律特征。第三部分研究了以物抵債的法律效力,主要分為有效、無(wú)效、可變更或可撤銷(xiāo)三種情形。首先,闡述了具有法律效力的情形有以物抵債合法有效成立且符合《合同法》規(guī)定和債務(wù)清償期屆滿后已實(shí)際履行兩種。其次,探討了以物抵債的無(wú)效情形,主要有原債權(quán)債務(wù)關(guān)系不成立、無(wú)效或被撤銷(xiāo),以物抵債協(xié)議自身無(wú)效或被撤銷(xiāo),于債務(wù)清償期屆滿前訂立的以物抵債,約定將擔(dān)保物權(quán)利轉(zhuǎn)讓給債權(quán)人的以物抵債和為消滅原債而成立新債的以物抵債。最后,分析了可變更或可撤銷(xiāo)的以物抵債有為清償舊債而負(fù)擔(dān)新債成立的以物抵債和當(dāng)事人因脅迫或重大誤解而后反悔撤銷(xiāo)以物抵債合意兩種情形。第四部分論述了我國(guó)以物抵債的制度完善。通過(guò)分析當(dāng)前以物抵債面臨的問(wèn)題,主要有:現(xiàn)有關(guān)于以物抵債的規(guī)定層級(jí)過(guò)低,類型及效力判定有失偏頗,以物抵債與買(mǎi)賣(mài)合同相混淆,請(qǐng)求權(quán)基礎(chǔ)存在爭(zhēng)議。進(jìn)而對(duì)完善我國(guó)以物抵債制度提出了建議。即要合理運(yùn)用意思表示解釋規(guī)則,在《合同法》中將以物抵債明確規(guī)定為一種有名合同,完善《物權(quán)法》和《擔(dān)保法》中以物抵債的相關(guān)規(guī)定,同時(shí)建立合理的評(píng)估制度和科學(xué)統(tǒng)一的折算標(biāo)準(zhǔn),為處理實(shí)踐中的糾紛提供明確的指引。本文的創(chuàng)新之處在于確定以物抵債的法律性質(zhì)并對(duì)其法律效力進(jìn)行積極探討,為將來(lái)完善我國(guó)以物抵債制度提供理論基礎(chǔ)。
[Abstract]:The debtor's debt is the legal act of the debtor in place of the original payment by the debtor in place of the original payment. The current social life and judicial practice in our country have a large number of debts and a lot of disputes caused by it, but there is a lack of relevant provisions in the law of our country and there is a great controversy in the theoretical circle, which leads to the judicial confirmation. Different cases of the same case, the legitimate interests of the parties can not be guaranteed. Therefore, we should study the system of the debt set up and explore the corresponding improvement measures so that it can better realize the value of the system. In addition to the preface and conclusion, this article is divided into four parts. The preface part is the explanation of why research is in debt. The existing problems in the current practice lead to the very important theoretical and practical significance of studying the debt to be in debt, and make a literature review of the study on the study of the debt set off, and show the current research status of the debt set off in our country. The first part discusses the justifiable nature of the debt set off, and the main purpose is the principle of autonomy of the meaning, the efficiency value and the benefit of the law. The theory of interest balance is expounded in three aspects. The principle of autonomy of meaning provides a theoretical basis for the existence of the existence of debt. The efficiency value of the law expounds the necessity of the existence of the existence of a debt in terms of economic efficiency and social efficiency, and the theory of interest balance reflects the benefit of multiparty main interests to achieve a win-win situation. The theory of interest balance is conducive to the realization of the multiparty main interests. This paper discusses the legal nature of the obligation to offset debt. First, it combs the various theories of the academic circles about the debt to the debt, mainly including the practice contract theory, the nocheng contract and the disposition of the three main views. Secondly, it evaluates the above theories, and the "practice contract theory" will be equivalent to the debt and the recharge of the agent, and in practice, it invoked the agent to pay off. According to the relevant regulations, "the action of disposition" does not admit that it is a contractual relationship, and both of them are not reasonable. This article holds that "the contract theory of noocheng" will be regarded as a kind of contractual relationship, which is more in line with the reality and the basic principle of the debt. The contract has the three legal characteristics of the cause, the attribute and the unpaid nature. The third part studies the legal effect of taking things out of debt, mainly divided into three cases, which are effective, invalid, changeable or revocable. First, it expounds that the situation with legal effect is valid and valid and is in accordance with the contract law and the expiry of the debt payment period. Secondly, it discusses the invalidity of the debt. In the case of the original creditor's right and debt relationship, which is ineffective, invalid or revoked, the debt contract itself is invalid or revoked, to set off the debt before the expiration of the debt expiry date, and to set up a debt to offset the debt of the creditor and to set up a new debt for the elimination of the original debt. Finally, the analysis can be made to change or withdraw. In the fourth part, the system consummation of the debt set up in our country is perfected in the fourth part of the two situations. The classification level is too low, the type and the validity of the decision are biased. The basis of the right of claim is disputed, and the basis of the right of claim is disputed. And then it puts forward some suggestions to improve the system of property right in our country. At the same time, the relevant provisions in the guarantee law, and the establishment of a reasonable evaluation system and the standard of conversion of scientific unity, provide clear guidance for dealing with disputes in practice. The innovation of this article is to determine the legal nature of the debt and actively explore its legal effect, and to improve the system of the debt set up in our country in the future. For theoretical basis.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：華中師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：D923

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 王洪亮;;以物抵債的解釋與構(gòu)建[J];陜西師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2016年06期

2 湯文平;;法典編纂視野下的請(qǐng)求權(quán)體系研究[J];蘭州學(xué)刊;2016年03期

3 張萌;;未轉(zhuǎn)移物權(quán)的以物抵債協(xié)議之效力認(rèn)定[J];中南財(cái)經(jīng)政法大學(xué)研究生學(xué)報(bào);2015年05期

4 崔建遠(yuǎn);;以物抵債效力的司法裁判規(guī)則[J];人民法治;2015年09期

5 夏正芳;;以物抵債的幾個(gè)法律問(wèn)題[J];人民法治;2015年09期

6 陳衛(wèi)佐;;處分行為理論之正本清源[J];政治與法律;2015年07期

7 李光祿;楊位龍;;代物清償?shù)男再|(zhì)及效力探析[J];山東科技大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2015年03期

8 高圣平;;民法典中擔(dān)保物權(quán)的體系重構(gòu)[J];法學(xué)雜志;2015年06期

9 馮永強(qiáng);;論以物抵債行為的性質(zhì)與效力[J];新疆社會(huì)科學(xué);2015年03期

10 陸青;;以房抵債協(xié)議的法理分析——《最高人民法院公報(bào)》載“朱俊芳案”評(píng)釋[J];法學(xué)研究;2015年03期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 徐茗洋;以物抵債研究[D];大連海事大學(xué);2015年

2 周顯卓;論以物抵債[D];昆明理工大學(xué);2014年

，

本文編號(hào)：1858113