婚外同居赠与效力问题研究

发布时间：2018-07-05 16:58

本文选题：婚外同居 + 婚外同居赠与　；参考：《东北财经大学》2016年硕士论文

【摘要】：2010年11月《最高人民法院关于适用中华人民共和国婚姻法若干问题的解释(三)》征求意见稿第二条规定:"有配偶者与他人同居,为解除同居关系约定了财产性补偿,一方要求支付该补偿或支付补偿后反悔主张返还的,人民法院不予支持;但合法婚姻当事人以侵犯夫妻共同财产权为由起诉主张返还的,人民法院应当受理并根据具体情况作出处理。"这是我国第一次对婚外同居赠与有关问题进行规定。但是由于该规定过于笼统且简单,并不能解决实践中婚外同居赠与的复杂情况,因此在最终出台的正式稿中删除了此条规定。在没有法律规定支撑的前提下,如何认定婚外同居赠与效力众说纷纭。理论界对此主要分为五种学说,即有效说、以动机区分效力说、部分有效说、无效说与按自然债务处理。有效说将婚外同居关系与赠与关系区别对待,认为婚外同居赠与实为《合同法》上的赠与合同,只要赠与为赠与人真实意思表示,婚外同居赠与即为有效;以动机区分效力说认为赠与是否有效要以赠与人的行为动机作为判断标准,若动机违反公序良俗原则,赠与无效,若动机符合公共秩序与善良风俗,赠与有效;部分有效说指出,夫妻共同财产为一人一半按份共有,若婚外同居赠与的财产内容涉及到夫妻共同财产,那么属于赠与人财产的那部分赠与有效,属于赠与人配偶合法财产的那部分赠与无效;无效说则主张婚外同居赠与违反法律与公序良俗原则应判无效;按自然债务处理将婚外同居赠与等同于自然债,认为法院不应当给予任何保护。理论界判定婚外同居赠与是否有效往往仅从财产法或是否违反公序良俗角度孤立看待该问题,没有权威结论,不能为司法实践提供有力的裁判依据。面对法律的真空地带,法官在审理这些案件时往往根据自己的经验作出判决,致使在司法实践中出现法律适用不统一的局面。本文笔者运用实证分析、比较分析的方法从新的角度出发,重新审视婚外同居赠与效力判断问题。本文在结构上除绪论和结语外主要分为五个部分。第一部分笔者在具体介绍"甘甲任夫妇诉卢小燕返还房屋纠纷案"的基础上,整理列举了 2001年至2015年间法院认定婚外同居赠与效力情况的典型案例,归纳得出案件争议点,即本文的研究重心——婚外同居赠与的效力问题,同时界定了婚外同居的概念并将其与非婚同居、重婚等相近概念进行辨析,明确婚外同居并不等同于生活中人们所说的非婚同居或重婚,且在归纳婚外同居赠与类型的基础上指出婚外同居赠与的性质是涉及身份关系的财产行为,这是本文写作的基础;第二部分阐述关于婚外同居赠与效力认定的理论学说,包括有效说、以动机区分效力说、部分有效说、无效说等,并对各学说进行评析,分析其不足之处;第三部分总结德国、法国以及我国台湾地区婚外同居赠与效力认定的司法实践,得出其效力判断依据,即应考察赠与人行为动机;第四部分是本文的核心部分,笔者通过借鉴域外有益经验,避免现有理论学说的不足之处,对婚外同居赠与效力认定的方法和原则提出自己的观点,即将婚外同居赠与依据财产性质分为三种不同类型,对每种类型的婚外同居赠与的效力认定依据不同的判定标准,并在此基础上确定举证责任的分配原则;第五部分笔者对婚外同居赠与效力认定后的有效婚外同居赠与及无效婚外同居赠与所涉的财产如何处理问题进行讨论,并着重阐述了处理无效婚外同居赠与财产问题的核心方法即不法原因给付制度,同时提出将赠与财产为价值较大的夫妻共同财产的婚外同居赠与纳入《婚姻法解释(三)》第4条第1款规定的解释当中,通过婚内财产分割保护赠与人配偶一方的合法财产权益。
[Abstract]:In November 2010, the Supreme People's court's interpretation of several questions on the application of the marriage law of People's Republic of China (three) > second articles of solicitation: "the spouse of a spouse cohabited with another, agreed to make a property compensation for the dissolution of the cohabitation relationship, and the people's court refused to support the return of the claim after the payment of the compensation or payment of compensation." However, the people's court shall accept and deal with the case in accordance with the specific circumstances. "This is the first time in our country to stipulate the issues relating to marriage and cohabitation for the first time. However, because the provision is too general and simple, it can not solve the complex gift of marriage outside the marriage." Miscellaneous circumstances, therefore, in the final release of the article deleted the provisions. Without the premise of legal provisions, how to determine how to determine the effectiveness of the marital cohabitation and the effectiveness of different opinions. The theoretical circle is divided into five theories, that is, to effectively say, to distinguish the effectiveness of motivation, partly effective, invalid and according to natural debt. The relationship between marriage cohabitation and the relationship of gift is different from that of the gift. It is believed that the gift of cohabitation is actually a gift contract in the contract law. As long as the gift is the true meaning of the gift, the gift of cohabitation outside the marriage is effective. The good custom principle, the gift is invalid, if the motive conforms to the public order and the good custom, the gift is effective; the part effectively says that the husband and wife's common property is shared by one person in half, if the property content of the congruent gift outside the marriage involves the common property of the husband and wife, then the part of the gift belonging to the gift is valid and belongs to the legal property of the spouse's spouse. That part of the gift is invalid; ineffective is to claim that the marriage cohabitation gift should be ineffective in violation of the law and the public order and good custom principle. According to the natural debt treatment, the gift of cohabitation is equal to the natural debt. It is considered that the court should not give any protection. The theorists judge whether the marriage cohabitation gift is effective only from the property law or whether it violates the public order. There are no authoritative conclusions and no authoritative conclusions, which can not provide a strong referee basis for judicial practice. In the face of the vacuum zone of the law, judges often make judgments according to their own experience in hearing these cases, resulting in the situation of legal application in judicial practice. The author uses empirical analysis to compare the differences. From a new point of view, the author reexamines the problem of judging the effectiveness of the gift of cohabitation outside of marriage. This article is divided into five parts in structure, except the introduction and conclusion. The first part, on the basis of the specific introduction of "Gan Jiaren and Mrs. Lu Xiao Yan return to housing disputes", enumerates the marriage outside the court from 2001 to 2015. A typical case of cohabitation grant effectiveness is summed up, that is, the focus of the study, that is, the issue of the effectiveness of the gift of cohabitation outside marriage. At the same time, the concept of cohabitation outside marriage is defined and the similar concepts such as unmarried cohabitation and bigamy are identified, and it is clear that cohabitation outside marriage is not equal to the non marital cohabitation said in life. Bigamy, and on the basis of the type of cohabitation giving out of marriage out of marriage, points out that the nature of marriage cohabitation gift is the property behavior involving identity relations, which is the basis of this article. The second part expounds the theoretical theory about the determination of the effectiveness of the gift of cohabitation outside marriage, including the effective theory, part effective, invalid, and so on. Each theory is evaluated and analyzed. The third part summarizes the judicial practice of determining the effectiveness of the gift of cohabitation in Germany, France and Taiwan, and draws the basis of its effectiveness judgment, that is to examine the motivation of the donor's behavior; the fourth part is the core part of this article, and the author avoids the existing theory by drawing on the useful experience from foreign countries. The inadequacies of the theory, put forward their own views on the methods and principles of the determination of the effectiveness of the gift of marriage outside marriage. It is about three different types according to the property nature of the marriage cohabitation gift, and the determination of the effectiveness of each type of extramarital cohabitation is based on the different criteria, and on this basis, the distribution principle of the burden of proof is determined; Fifth The author discusses the problem of how to deal with the property involved in the effective marriage cohabitation gift and the non effective marriage cohabitation gift, and emphasizes the core method of dealing with the problem of the inhabitation gift and property outside the marriage. The marriage extramarital cohabitation of the wife's common property is included in the interpretation of the interpretation of the marriage law interpretation (three) and the fourth provisions of the first paragraphs. The legal property rights and interests of the spouse of the donor are protected by the division of the marital property.
【学位授予单位】：东北财经大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2016
【分类号】：D923.9

【参考文献】