English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 113822/144841 (79%)
Visitors : 51784989      Online Users : 402
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
    •  Adv. Search
    Home ‧ Login ‧ Upload ‧ Help ‧ About ‧ Administer Goto mobile version


    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/114422


    Title: 立法者奉送的毒蘋果──從「另類觀點」論民法第九十二條與第九十三條是錯誤立法
    A Poisoned Apple Offered by the Lawmakers: Why are §§ 92 and 93 of the Taiwanese Civil Code Wrong Regulations?
    Authors: 黃瑞明
    Huang, Juei-Min
    Keywords: 私法自治;法社會學;美國法律現實主義;法律受規人（庶民）;民法第九十二條;第九十三條;詐欺;脅迫;民法第七十二條;公序良俗
    §§ 72, 92 and 93 of the Taiwanese Civil Code;Fraud;Duress;Juridical Act;expression of Intent;Right of Revocation;Public Policy or Morals;American Legal Realism;Sociological Aspects
    Date: 2015-09
    Issue Date: 2017-11-07 10:44:50 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 基於私法自治原則，民法立法者僅在極端情況下始介入私法關係，「有效但得撤銷」與無效即是兩種介入方式。第九十二條與第九十三條對於因被詐欺或被脅迫而為之意思表示所作的規範屬於前者。對於習於法教義學思維的我國學者來說，相關條文都繼受自德國，其正確性不言可喻。儘管如此，本文仍嘗試提出一個「異端邪說」，論證此二規定在實際上造成不利於被詐欺人與被脅迫人的「有效且不得撤銷」結果。對於他們來說，必須於除斥期間之內行使撤銷權以及在訴訟上盡舉證責任等都是難度極高的障礙。如此一來，加害人反而可以保有不法獲利。為強調觀點之不同足以得出迥異之結論，本文特別提出法社會學（包括荷爾姆斯所代表的美國法律現實主義）與法律受規人（其中的被害人與非法律人）的觀點。筆者以身為連動債被害人的訴訟經驗印證現行法的問題重重，並主張通往解決之道的第一步應是刪除此二規定而代以第七十二條，蓋詐欺與脅迫均違反公序良俗也。
    Private autonomy is the foundation of modern civil law. Juridical acts which include contracts will thus be deemed as illegal only in exceptional cases. They can be either void or revoked, while the former solution is the strongest form of legislative disapproval. As regards the latter one, §§ 92 and 93 of the Taiwanese Civil Code offer an explicit example. Ever since the reception of the Continental model (especially the German one) in the early 20th Century by the Republic of China, these two paragraphs remain intact and stipulate that a juridical act can be revoked by the party whose decision is influenced by fraud or duress within one year. It is and will stay valid as long as the right of revocation is not exercised within one year from the date the fraud was discovered or when the duress ceased. Such regulations mean to protect the victim, but in reality they often benefit the offender instead, for the former has little knowledge about the law concerned and might thus miss the specified period to enact his or her right. It could be argued that the mentioned articles are indeed a poisoned apple for victims seeking justice. Through legal sociological perspectives including American Legal Realism and the views of non-jurists subjected to the law, this research maintains that § 72 rather than §§ 92 and 93 provides the best solution for the party who falls victim to fraud or duress. This study proposes that a juridical act is void for being against public policy or morals. Its legal effect must coincide with the regulatory need of the juridical acts procured by fraud or duress. Through abolishing §§ 92 and 93 and applying § 72 instead, justice could be better served since the act concerned is per se void and victims do not need to revoke the act.
    Relation: 政大法學評論, 142, 47-147
    Data Type: article
    DOI 連結: http://dx.doi.org/10.3966/102398202015090142002
    DOI: 10.3966/102398202015090142002
    Appears in Collections:[政大法學評論 TSSCI] 期刊論文

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    142-2.pdf2199KbAdobe PDF2337View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏，無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用，惟仍請適度，合理使用本網站之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作，已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益，如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw)，維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback