悬赏广告法律问题研究

【作者】 吴小东；

【导师】 胡小红；

【作者基本信息】 安徽大学 ， 法律， 2006， 硕士

【摘要】 对于悬赏广告，我国现行法律没有作出明确的规定，学术界争议颇大，实务上意见纷纭。本文立足于司法实际，综合运用比较方法、历史分析方法和利益衡量方法等，试图在对悬赏广告的法律问题进行全面研究的基础上，找到较为合理的解决方法，并为将来的立法提出建议。全文由四部分组成。 第一部分从悬赏广告的概念、法律性质、特征及与相关概念的区别四个方面探讨了悬赏广告的基本理论问题。悬赏广告有广、狭两种含义，狭义的悬赏广告指悬赏声明，广义的悬赏广告是发出悬赏声明与完成指定行为结合而成的法律关系。悬赏广告的法律性质属于单方法律行为还是合同一直存在争论，本文认为，两种学说均可对悬赏广告作出解释，理论上各有优点，实践中也互相取长补短，但从悬赏广告制度的目的及当事人的意思等角度出发，悬赏广告的双方性特点更为明显，合同说更具合理性。基于合同说理论，悬赏广告的法律特征是属单务、有偿、实践合同，其要约是向不特定人发出的，承诺须通过行为作出。本文还将悬赏广告与赠与合同、承揽合同及商业广告进行了比较。 第二部分从悬赏广告的成立、生效和权利义务关系三个方面论述悬赏广告法律制度的主要内容。悬赏广告的要约是悬赏声明，在一定条件下，悬赏声明可以撤销，完成指定行为是对悬赏声明的承诺，指定行为完成后，悬赏广告即成立。悬赏广告除具备合同的一般生效要件外，还要求行为人不得为对指定行为的完成负有法定义务或特定合同义务的人。悬赏广告的权利义务关系主要为行为人的报酬请求权和广告人的给付报酬义务，报酬数额不明时应考虑相关的因素确定合理的数额，对于数人完成指定行为的，应区别不同的情况处理，广告人善意给付报酬于最先通知之人时，其给付报酬的义务即消灭。对于行为人为完成指定行为支付的费用，如果成立无因管理，可以由行为人选择适用悬赏广告或无因管理，否则费用由行为人承担。 第三部分论述了几种常见的悬赏广告。关于优等悬赏广告，本文总结了优等悬赏广告的一些特点，分析了优等悬赏声明的性质。认为应从以下方面加强对优等悬赏广告行为人的保护：明确优等悬赏广告的内容；禁止优等悬赏广告的撤销；规定广告人的评定义务；限制优等空缺；保护行为人的知识产权。关于遗失物悬赏广告，本文认为遗失物悬赏广告与我国现行法律规定没有冲突，也不因广告人意思表示不真实而无效。在探讨遗失物拾得制度之后，提出应赋予拾得人报酬请求权以平衡拾得人的权利义务，并在此基础上要求遗失物悬赏广告中的拾得人应承担通知、公告或报告、保管等义务。关于刑事悬赏广告，本文认为刑事悬赏广告法律关系是民事法律关系，刑事悬赏广告的发布人宜限制为侦查机关，并论述犯罪者的共同犯罪人或窝藏、包庇者、被动提供了破案线索的证人、犯罪者的近亲属不宜作为刑事悬赏广告的行为人，而其他犯罪嫌疑人或罪犯可以成为行为人。对于行为人因完成刑事悬赏指定行为所遭受的损失，建议完善相应的社会救助机制。 第四部分提出了悬赏广告的立法建议。更多还原

【Abstract】 Reward hasn’t been regulated clearly in China, so there are different opinions about it in theory and legal practice. After thorough research of reward, the author tries to find out reasonable solution and provide some advices on the future legislation on the basis of legal practice, through comprehensive use of comparative method, analytical method of history and method of interest evaluation. The paper consists of four parts.In the first part, the basic theory of reward is analyzed involving its concept, nature and characteristics and comparison of other relevant concepts. There are two kinds of concepts of reward in the narrow sense and the broad sense. Narrowly, a reward is the advertisement of reward, and broadly, a reward means a kind of legal relation involving combination of advertisement of and performance of certain obligation. It is uncertain whether a reward is unilateral legal act or contract or not. The author argues that the two kinds of doctrines can interpret reward, and the both have their own reasonability and complement each other in practice. Considering the purpose of reward and the intent of the parties, a reward seems to be mutual and should be regarded as a contract. According to the contract doctrine, a reward is unilateral, rewarding, and performing. Its offerees are uncertain and the offer can be accepted only by performance. The author also compares reward with donation contract, work contract and commercial advertisement.The second part talks about the establishment, effectiveness and relation of right and obligation of reward. Its offer is the advertisement which can be rescinded under certain conditions. Performance is the acceptance of reward and after that, a reward is effective. Except for the basic elements, a reward excludes the persons who have statutory or contract obligation for its performance. The relation between right and obligation means that right to petition for remuneration of the performer and the obligation of adviser to pay. In case of unclear sum of remuneration, the reward should be performed reasonably. If more than one performs, the obligation should beover after the first one is rewarded kindly. The charge for the performance should be repaid by the offer if management of no cause is founded. Or no should be responsible for it except the performer himself.The third part mentions several familiar rewards. Summarizing characteristics of high-class reward and analyzing its nature, the author contends for the interests of performers that the contents of reward should be clarified, rescission not allowed, the obligation to evaluation regulated and relevant intellectual property rights protected. As for a reward for lost property, the author argues that it is not against the present provision and should not be regard null and void. After that the author suggests that the one who pick up the lost should own the right for remuneration. At the same time, he may shoulder the obligation to notice, announce or report and deposit, etc. The penal reward belongs to civil legal relation. Its offeror should be restricted to the investigation organ. Thus the parties of a reward does not include the criminal in a joint crime, a person who harbours criminals and contraband goods, witness who is forced to suggest criminal clues, or near relative etc. Other suspects or criminals can be parties of reward. As for the loss caused by a penal reward, the author also suggests that some social salvation organ should be perfected.Some legislative advices on rewards are provided in the fourth part of the paper.更多还原