沉默欺诈法律问题研究
发布时间：2019-02-26 18:12
【摘要】：沉默欺诈是一种以不作为的方式构成的欺诈。我国不仅在正式的法律法规中并未明确提及,学界对此亦探讨甚少。沉默本身是一种纯粹的不作为,相对于作为而言,法院要从外观上认定其构成欺诈存在困难,随着沉默欺诈的越发常见,各国开始普通以先合同告知义务(以下简称“告知义务”)的存在作为可认定沉默构成欺诈的前提,进而认定欺诈成立。沉默欺诈除需以告知义务为前提外,亦需满足一般欺诈的构成要件。本文创新点在于对沉默欺诈认定的具体参考要素,沉默欺诈的认定一直都是难题,理论也只能列出参考的要素。在翻阅了众多的案件后,笔者试图总结出司法实践中能够直接参考的几大因素,其能够运用到解决实际问题中去,望有助于科学合理地建构未来民法典的沉默欺诈理论。笔者认为诚实信用原则是沉默欺诈的主要理论基础,因诚信原则的存在故在某些情形下当事人有告知的义务,从而形成沉默欺诈成立的前提。我国对于沉默欺诈在法律规定和理论学说中都未得到足够的重视,而世界上其他国家大部分已对沉默欺诈有着较为成熟的理论与实践,故域外的理论与实践能够作为我国沉默欺诈理论发展的参考,能够在我国基本国情的基础上引入一些先进的思想,推动我国沉默欺诈理论和实践的发展;第三部分是我国沉默欺诈的现状,主要介绍了我国现在关于沉默欺诈的理论和立法以及司法实践的情况,要先对现状有所了解,才能发现问题,寻找原因,从而解决问题实现进步;第四部分是笔者主要的观点,对我国未来民法典中沉默欺诈之重构进行了论述,对沉默欺诈的理论基础进行梳理,着重论述了沉默欺诈的构成要件、认定以及抗辩理由,在已在的学说基础上阐述笔这的观点。这儿个问题在学界中与实践中都有着较大争议,并发展出不同学说,笔者尽量在我国现有法律体系基础上提出最适合我国实践适用的规则。我国现在对沉默欺诈尚未引起足够的重.视,导致实践中很多当事人不能通过法律来寻求正义,法律规定与理论学说的缺乏亦导致法院在判决过程中无法维持判决的稳定,无法从法律上来支持当事人的合理诉求,保护他们的合法权益。所以我国沉默欺诈急需纳入欺诈的法律规制范畴内,以正式法律条文的形式对受害人予以保护。
[Abstract]:Silence fraud is a kind of fraud constituted by omission. China is not only not explicitly mentioned in the formal laws and regulations, but also rarely discussed in the academic circles. Silence itself is a pure omission, and it is difficult for the court to determine in appearance that it constitutes fraud, as silence fraud becomes more and more common, Countries begin to take the existence of the obligation of prior contract (hereinafter referred to as the obligation of notification) as the premise that silence constitutes fraud, and then determine that fraud is valid. Silent fraud should not only take the obligation of notification as the premise, but also satisfy the constituent elements of general fraud. The innovation of this paper lies in the specific reference elements of the identification of silence fraud. The identification of silence fraud has always been a difficult problem, and the theory can only list the reference elements. After reading many cases, the author tries to sum up several factors which can be referred to directly in judicial practice, which can be applied to solve practical problems, hoping to help to construct the silent fraud theory of the future civil code scientifically and reasonably. The author thinks that the principle of good faith is the main theoretical basis of silent fraud. Due to the existence of the principle of good faith, the parties have the obligation to inform under certain circumstances, thus forming the premise of the establishment of silent fraud. Our country has not paid enough attention to silence fraud in the legal provisions and theoretical theories, but most of the other countries in the world have more mature theory and practice on silence fraud. Therefore, the theory and practice outside the territory can be used as a reference for the development of the theory of silence fraud in China, and some advanced ideas can be introduced on the basis of the basic national conditions of our country to promote the development of the theory and practice of silence fraud in China. The third part is the present situation of silence fraud in our country, which mainly introduces the theory and legislation of silence fraud and the situation of judicial practice. Only by understanding the present situation can we find out the problems and find out the reasons. In order to solve the problem to achieve progress; The fourth part is the author's main point of view, discusses the reconstruction of silence fraud in the future civil code of our country, combs the theoretical basis of silence fraud, and emphatically discusses the constituent elements, identification and defense reasons of silence fraud. This view is elaborated on the basis of the theory already in place. This issue is controversial both in academic circles and in practice, and has developed different theories. The author tries his best to put forward the most suitable rules for China's practice on the basis of the existing legal system in China. At present, our country has not given enough weight to silence fraud. As a result, many parties in practice cannot seek justice through the law, and the lack of legal provisions and theoretical theories has also led to the court's inability to maintain the stability of the judgment in the course of adjudication and to support the reasonable demands of the parties from the law. Protect their legitimate rights and interests. Therefore, silent fraud in our country needs to be brought into the scope of legal regulation of fraud to protect the victims in the form of formal legal provisions.
【学位授予单位】：湖南大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D924.35
本文编号：2431019
[Abstract]:Silence fraud is a kind of fraud constituted by omission. China is not only not explicitly mentioned in the formal laws and regulations, but also rarely discussed in the academic circles. Silence itself is a pure omission, and it is difficult for the court to determine in appearance that it constitutes fraud, as silence fraud becomes more and more common, Countries begin to take the existence of the obligation of prior contract (hereinafter referred to as the obligation of notification) as the premise that silence constitutes fraud, and then determine that fraud is valid. Silent fraud should not only take the obligation of notification as the premise, but also satisfy the constituent elements of general fraud. The innovation of this paper lies in the specific reference elements of the identification of silence fraud. The identification of silence fraud has always been a difficult problem, and the theory can only list the reference elements. After reading many cases, the author tries to sum up several factors which can be referred to directly in judicial practice, which can be applied to solve practical problems, hoping to help to construct the silent fraud theory of the future civil code scientifically and reasonably. The author thinks that the principle of good faith is the main theoretical basis of silent fraud. Due to the existence of the principle of good faith, the parties have the obligation to inform under certain circumstances, thus forming the premise of the establishment of silent fraud. Our country has not paid enough attention to silence fraud in the legal provisions and theoretical theories, but most of the other countries in the world have more mature theory and practice on silence fraud. Therefore, the theory and practice outside the territory can be used as a reference for the development of the theory of silence fraud in China, and some advanced ideas can be introduced on the basis of the basic national conditions of our country to promote the development of the theory and practice of silence fraud in China. The third part is the present situation of silence fraud in our country, which mainly introduces the theory and legislation of silence fraud and the situation of judicial practice. Only by understanding the present situation can we find out the problems and find out the reasons. In order to solve the problem to achieve progress; The fourth part is the author's main point of view, discusses the reconstruction of silence fraud in the future civil code of our country, combs the theoretical basis of silence fraud, and emphatically discusses the constituent elements, identification and defense reasons of silence fraud. This view is elaborated on the basis of the theory already in place. This issue is controversial both in academic circles and in practice, and has developed different theories. The author tries his best to put forward the most suitable rules for China's practice on the basis of the existing legal system in China. At present, our country has not given enough weight to silence fraud. As a result, many parties in practice cannot seek justice through the law, and the lack of legal provisions and theoretical theories has also led to the court's inability to maintain the stability of the judgment in the course of adjudication and to support the reasonable demands of the parties from the law. Protect their legitimate rights and interests. Therefore, silent fraud in our country needs to be brought into the scope of legal regulation of fraud to protect the victims in the form of formal legal provisions.
【学位授予单位】：湖南大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D924.35
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前7条
1 金柏莉·D·克拉维克;凯瑟琳·齐勒;牟宪魁;王盛雅;;英美法上的说明义务与民事责任(上)[J];山东大学法律评论;2013年00期
2 左登;;论不作为欺诈认定——基于民法原则和法经济学的分析[J];湘潭师范学院学报(社会科学版);2009年01期
3 孙良国;;不动产交易信息披露义务研究——基础框架的设定[J];当代法学;2008年01期
4 牟宪魁;;说明义务违反与沉默的民事诈欺构成——以“信息上的弱者”之保护为中心[J];法律科学(西北政法学院学报);2007年04期
5 赵万一;民法公平原则的伦理分析[J];重庆社会科学;2004年02期
6 胡吕银;论沉默构成诈欺的条件与认定[J];法治论丛;2003年03期
7 张淳;;浅议对告知义务不履行与沉默欺诈[J];南京大学法律评论;2001年02期
相关硕士学位论文 前2条
1 陈本林;沉默欺诈研究[D];南京大学;2013年
2 李登峰;论沉默欺诈[D];厦门大学;2007年
，本文编号：2431019
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/minfalunwen/2431019.html
