本文關(guān)鍵詞： 民事執(zhí)行 分配方案 異議制度　出處：《內(nèi)蒙古大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：民事執(zhí)行分配方案異議制度是參與分配制度發(fā)展的產(chǎn)物,是民事執(zhí)行救濟(jì)制度的組成部分。權(quán)利救濟(jì)、程序正義以及權(quán)力制約三大理論是該制度的理論基礎(chǔ),而執(zhí)行公正和執(zhí)行效率則是該制度的價值追求。民事執(zhí)行分配方案異議制度劃分為程序性分配方案異議制度與實體性分配方案異議制度,即包括執(zhí)行行為異議、分配方案異議(狹義)以及分配方案異議之訴三種方式。我國經(jīng)過2007年的民事訴訟法的修改以及2008年執(zhí)行程序司法解釋的出臺,正式建立了民事執(zhí)行分配方案異議制度,這在我國民事執(zhí)行立法上是一個重大突破和進(jìn)步。然而,從建立到如今,我國的民事執(zhí)行分配方案異議制度不僅在立法上存在許多內(nèi)容的欠缺,還在司法操作中衍生出了諸多不規(guī)范的問題,這導(dǎo)致該制度并未如人們所期待般地發(fā)揮其最大作用。因此,本文以前人的研究成果為基礎(chǔ),通過比較借鑒外國及我國臺灣地區(qū)的相關(guān)制度,結(jié)合民事訴訟的基本理論,針對制度中存在的問題提出一些建議,以期能夠為民事執(zhí)行分配方案異議制度的整體完善提供可參考的內(nèi)容。本文共由四個部分組成： 第一部分對民事執(zhí)行分配方案異議制度進(jìn)行了理論研究。首先,介紹了民 事執(zhí)行分配方案異議制度的產(chǎn)生、概念以及內(nèi)容；其次,介紹了該制度的三大理論基礎(chǔ)；再次,分析該制度所追求的兩大法律價值；最后,介紹了學(xué)界關(guān)于該制度存在的幾點爭議。第二部分為民事執(zhí)行分配方案異議制度的比較法考察。經(jīng)過對德國、法國、 日本、韓國以及我國臺灣地區(qū)相關(guān)立法內(nèi)容的考察,總結(jié)這些國家及地區(qū)民事執(zhí)行分配方案異議制度的特點及其可借鑒之處。 第三部分具體分析我國民事執(zhí)行分配方案異議制度的立法現(xiàn)狀與司法現(xiàn)狀,發(fā)現(xiàn)該制度存在立法內(nèi)容過于簡略、具體操作不規(guī)范、法院審查處理隨意等問題。 第四部分為我國民事執(zhí)行分配方案異議制度的完善提供了具體建議。不僅要對程序性分配方案異議制度與實體性分配方案異議制度分別進(jìn)行完善,還要,實施一些配套措施予以支持。
[Abstract]:The dissent system of civil execution distribution scheme is the product of participating in the development of distribution system, and it is the component of civil execution relief system. The three theories of right relief, procedural justice and power restriction are the theoretical basis of this system. Civil execution distribution scheme objection system can be divided into procedural distribution scheme objection system and substantive distribution scheme objection system, that is, execution behavior objection system. After the amendment of civil procedure law in 2007 and the judicial interpretation of execution procedure in 2008. The formal establishment of the civil execution distribution scheme objection system, which is a major breakthrough and progress in our civil execution legislation. However, from the establishment to now. The dissent system of civil execution distribution scheme in our country not only has many deficiencies in legislation, but also gives rise to many non-standard problems in the judicial operation. As a result, the system does not play its greatest role as expected. Therefore, based on the previous research results, this paper compares the relevant systems of foreign countries and Taiwan region. Combined with the basic theory of civil litigation, some suggestions are put forward in view of the problems in the system. In order to provide reference content for the whole perfection of the dissent system of civil execution distribution scheme, this paper consists of four parts: The first part has carried on the theoretical research to the civil execution distribution scheme dissent system. First, has introduced the people. The emergence, concept and content of the dissenting system of the distribution scheme; Secondly, it introduces the three theoretical bases of the system. Thirdly, it analyzes the two legal values pursued by the system. Finally, the author introduces some disputes about the system in academic circles. The second part is a comparative study of the dissent system of civil execution distribution scheme. Based on the investigation of relevant legislation in Japan, South Korea and Taiwan, this paper summarizes the characteristics of the dissent system of civil execution and distribution scheme in these countries and regions and the points that can be used for reference. The third part concretely analyzes the legislation and judicial status of the dissent system of civil execution distribution scheme in China, and finds that the legislative content of this system is too brief and the concrete operation is not standard. The court examined and dealt with issues such as arbitrariness. The 4th part provides specific suggestions for the improvement of the objection system of the civil execution distribution scheme in China. It is necessary not only to perfect the objection system of the procedural distribution scheme and the objection system of the substantive distribution scheme, but also to improve the objection system of the substantive distribution scheme. The implementation of some supporting measures to support.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：內(nèi)蒙古大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D925.1

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 童兆洪,林翔榮;民事執(zhí)行救濟(jì)制度芻論[J];比較法研究;2002年03期

2 尹偉民;民事執(zhí)行程序中的參與分配制度[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2003年12期

3 馬登科;程序上的執(zhí)行救濟(jì)與實體上的執(zhí)行救濟(jì)[J];湖北社會科學(xué);2001年08期

4 黃金龍;臺灣強(qiáng)制執(zhí)行法上的救濟(jì)程序[J];法律適用;1994年09期

5 朱淼蛟;唐學(xué)兵;曹慧敏;;執(zhí)行異議之訴的程序構(gòu)造[J];法律適用;2006年09期

6 肖建國;;《民事訴訟法》執(zhí)行編修改的若干問題探討以民事強(qiáng)制執(zhí)行救濟(jì)制度的適用為中心[J];法律適用;2008年04期

7 楊柳;;比較與借鑒:中德執(zhí)行分配方案異議之訴的制度架構(gòu)分析[J];法律適用;2011年08期

8 李世成;;論執(zhí)行分配方案異議之訴的程序構(gòu)造[J];法律適用;2011年09期

9 陳瑞華;論程序正義價值的獨立性[J];法商研究(中南政法學(xué)院學(xué)報);1998年02期

10 牟逍媛;完善民事執(zhí)行救濟(jì)的程序保障機(jī)制[J];法學(xué);2005年07期

，

本文編號：1460361