论不法原因给付

【作者】 卓洁辉；

【导师】 谭启平；

【作者基本信息】 西南政法大学 ， 民商法学， 2003， 硕士

【摘要】 不法原因给付是大陆法系债法的一个重要法律制度。在大陆法系各国立法中，不法原因给付一般被视为不当得利的一种。然而，与普通不当得利不同的是，为消极地制裁不法原因给付，不法原因给付一般不得要求返还，故不法原因给付又被称为不当得利的例外。在现代民法中，虽然这一规则出现了诸多的例外，然而，在比较了各国的立法并对这一规则进行了深层次的剖析之后，本文认为，这一处理机制作为不法原因给付制度基本处理规则的地位依然是坚固的，因为它体现了一种严密的法律思维，是极具合理性的。 我国当前在处理不法原因给付案件中的混乱及不合理，均源于立法上的缺陷。鉴于此，本文认为，我国有必要引入大陆法系的原因理论及不法原因给付处理规则。最后，本文针对我国不法原因给付制度的建立与完善，提出了自己的建议并进行了相应的制度设计。 本文主要分为四部分。 第一部分为不法原因给付的概述。首先从释义的角度解释了“不法”、“原因”及“给付”，并将不法原因给付定义为：基于违反强行法规或公序良俗的原因而终局地移转财产利益于对方的行为；其次，在区别了不法原因给付与普通不当得利的基础上，探讨了不法原因给付的构成要件；最后，本部分尚对不法原因给付进行了基本的分类，并比较了各国关于不法原因给付的立法。 第二部分讨论了大陆法系的原因理论及其对我国的现实意义。本部分分析了原因理论产生的历史背影，并对客观原因理论和主观原因理论进行了评析，认为原因应是客观原因及主观原因的统一。同时，本文也认为，进入现代民法之后，虽然原因作为民事行为效力积极要件的角色已逐渐丧失，然而，其作为消极要件的作用仍然是十分明显的，这是社会公共利益对个人意志的限制，是社会本位的必然要求。另外，本部分还区分了原因不法、标的不法及标的物不法，并探讨了这三者的不同法律效果，从而论证了我国引入原因理论及不法原因给付制度是具有重要现实意义的。 第三部分分析了不法原因给付的处理机制。在不法原因给付中，其实存在着两个阶段及两个可责难的理由。第一个阶段是给付人基于不法原因而进行了给付，这是第一个可责难的理由；第二个阶段是在不法原因给付声‘长得到非法利益或者其不法动机未获得完全的满足时，又意图以自己的 “丑行”为理由而寻求法律秩序的保护，这是对司法权的滥用，是第二个可受责难的理由。在此基础上，本文认为，主张不法原因给付应当返还的观点只停留在不法原因给付的第一个阶段，仅体现了对不法原因给付第一个可责难理由的处罚，但在实际上却满足了第二个可责难的要求。这种做法忽视了重点，有舍本逐末之嫌。这虽然会避免环合法即合法”的现象的出现，但却在实质上促成了“合法即不合法”的深层次的不公的生成。另外，在结合了司法成本等其他方面的考虑的基础上，本文认为，不法原因给付不得要求返还仍应是不法原因给付的基本处理模式。 在基本处理模式之外，不法原因给付处理机制尚存在着诸多的例外。从立法目的出发，这些例外规则与基本规则应是统一的，均是实现不法原因给付制度的立法目的及社会公共利益的需要。 第四部分在总结前三部分的基础上，认为我国立法应借鉴大陆法系立法，引入原因理论以细化、完善我国的民事行为无效制度，并应参照大陆法系的立法，建立、完善我国的不法原因给付处理规则。最后，遵循上述思路，本部分对我国的不法原因给付规则进行了试探胜的制度设计。更多还原

【Abstract】 As one important legal system of law of obligation in continental law system, unlawful cause prestation has normally been regarded as one kind of ill-gotten gains in system of civil law. However, being different from normal ill-gotten gains, unlawful cause prestation should not be asked for regaining in normal in order to negatively punish the act. For this reason, unlawful cause prestation is often called as the exception for ill-gotten gains. Though many exceptions of this principle has appeared in modern civil law, after comparing to many countries’ legislations and deeply researching the principle, this thesis believes that the status of the principle as the basic mechanism to deal with unlawful cause prestation is firm, for it reasonably presents one kind of strict legal idea.The present confusing and unreasonable situation of our country in dealing with the case concerning with unlawful cause prestation all lies in the defect of the legislation, so the thesis holds that we must introduce the cause theory and performing mechanism of unlawful cause prestation in continental law system into our legislation, also, the thesis presents its suggestions and legislative design in order to establish and perfect our country’s unlawful cause prestation rules.This thesis consists of four parts.Part one is the basis of the unlawful cause prestation. Firstly, it interprets the meaning of "unlawful", "cause" and "prestation". Then, it gives the meaning of unlawful cause prestation as the act that finally transfers the rights of the property to others on the basis of breaching the compulsory rules of the public policy and good morals; Secondly, after discriminating the unlawful cause prestation and normal ill-gotten gains, this thesis gets the components of unlawful cause prestation; Finally, this part makes some basic classifications and compares some countries’ legislation of unlawful cause prestation.Part two discuss the current meaning of the continental law system’s cause theory to our country. In this part, this thesis analyzes the historicalbackgrounds for the appearance of cause theory and evaluates the objective cause theory and subjective cause theory. Then, the thesis holds that cause should be defined as the unity of objective cause and subjective cause, also, though the status of cause as a positive role to the effect of civil acts has fad, its negative role is obvious till now, for it’s limitation of the personal will by the public interest, and it is the require of the social-oriented trends. In addition, this part also holds that the introduction of cause theory and the rules of unlawful cause prestation is of great current meaning to our country after discriminating the unlawful cause, unlawful object and unlawful subject matter and analyzing their different effect of law.Part three analyzes the performing mechanism of unlawful cause prestation. There are two stages and reasons to be abused on unlawful cause prestation. The first one is the prestation on the unlawful cause, and the second one is the person who make the prestation intends to pursuit the shelter of the law on the grounds of his "ugly act" while he has not obtained the illegal benefits or fully fulfilled his unlawful intend. Owing to this, this thesis believes that returning the unlawful cause prestation can only punish the first stage and simply concern with the first reason of unlawful cause prestation, so it is a solution beside the point. In addition, taking the judicial cost into consideration, this thesis finally draws a conclusion that "unlawful cause prestation should not be taken back" should still be the basic performing mechanism for the rules of unlawful cause prestation.There are many exceptions in addition to the basic performing mechanism. However, form the view of legislative interest, they are all unity in the needs of fulfilling the legislative intend and public interest of unlawful cause prestation.Part four holds that our country should introduce the cause theory and the rules of unlawful cause presta更多还原