“知假买假”的理论阐释与法律适用

发布时间：2018-03-05 02:20

本文选题：知假买假　切入点：消费者　出处：《法学论坛》2017年03期 　论文类型：期刊论文

【摘要】：在借鉴赌博罪构成要件的基础上,根据"知假买假"者的主观目的与客观行为,可以将其区分为消费者与非消费者。前者适用消费者权益保护规范,但并不意味着其一定能获得惩罚性赔偿;后者应适用合同规范与行政奖励制度,逐步实现从职业打假人转变为职业举报人。《民通意见》第68条存在将"欺诈"混淆为"欺诈行为"之嫌,这一定程度上造成了《消法》第55条适用的理论争议与裁判不一,也使得部门规章、地方法规与司法解释之间产生了龃龉。但即便将《消法》第55条所称的"欺诈行为"限于经营者单方行为,消费者获得惩罚性赔偿仍然需要以经营者存在瑕疵担保责任为基础。"知假买假"获赔所涉及的法律规范可分为基础性规范、构成性规范与判断性规范三种类型,不同规范在"知假买假"获赔中起着不同作用。
[Abstract]:On the basis of drawing lessons from the constitutive elements of the crime of gambling, according to the subjective purpose and objective behavior of the person who "knows the fake and buys the fake", it can be divided into consumer and non-consumer. The former applies to the protection of consumer's rights and interests. However, it does not necessarily mean that punitive damages can be obtained; the latter should be subject to contractual norms and administrative incentives, Gradually realizing the transformation from a professional anti-counterfeiter to a professional whistleblower. Article 68 of the "opinions of the people's Association" has the suspicion of confusing "fraud" with "fraudulent behavior", which to some extent leads to different theoretical disputes and judgments on the application of Article 55 of the "Consumer Law". It also creates a discord between departmental regulations, local laws and judicial interpretations. But even if the term "fraud" referred to in section 55 of the Consumer Law is limited to the unilateral acts of the operator, It is still necessary for consumers to obtain punitive damages on the basis of the liability of the operator for warranty with defects. The legal norms involved in obtaining compensation for "knowing fake and buying fake" can be divided into three types: basic norms, constitutive norms and adjudicative norms. Different norms play different roles in the compensation of "knowing fake and buying fake".
【作者单位】：北京航空航天大学法学院;
【分类号】：D922.294

【参考文献】