关于K市民事执行和解制度的调研报告

发布时间：2018-01-24 18:36

本文关键词： 执行和解司法效率和解协议　出处：《辽宁大学》2014年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：民事执行和解制度是我国民事执行程序中的一项重要制度，是当事人意思自治原则在执行领域的体现和延伸，也是当事人行使处分权的体现。执行和解是指在执行程序中，当事人双方相互让步，就生效裁判所确认法律关系(权利)的实现达成合意，并将该和解协议提请执行法院审查认可，以暂缓或中止、终结执行程序的行为或制度。所以执行和解也成为重要的结案方式之一,在我国的司法实践中具有重大的实践价值。执行和解的应用不但能够降低执行成本，而且还能以充分尊重当事人意愿、灵活方便的方式解决纠纷。我国司法实践中的“执行难”是在执行中的一大问题，而执行和解制度的存在可以一定程度上缓解此问题，，具有重大的理论价和实践价值。但目前我国法律在立法上对执行和解制度的规定简单，因而相关理论在实践运行中不仅没能够充分有效的发挥其价值和作用，甚至使得其在实践中还产生了一些问题。为此，笔者在司法工作一线即K市人民法院进行了专门的调查研究。本文通过笔者在调查研究所得的一些材料为基础，分析执行和解制度在立法、实践过程中的不足之处，总结实践运行中主要存在的一些共性问题：第一，案件的执行和解率偏高，存在执行法官过分干涉和解甚至强制和解案件的情况；第二，关于执行和解协议的内容以及形式存在适用混乱的情形；第三，执行和解高效解决纠纷的效果不佳；第四，当事人恶意和解时有存在，债权人与第三人利益被侵犯。分析此制度运行中产生这些问题的原因主要有四方面：第一，法院以及执行法官在执行和解中的地位不明确；第二，有关执行和解协议的履行相关事项没有明确的规范和严格的审查制度；第三，执行和解协议的效力不明确；第四，达成和解后的救济途径不明确。通过以上对问题的总结和问题产生原因的分析，深入全面的研究民事执行和解制度，从法院、执行法官在执行和解中地位，规范和解协议履行事项，执行和解协议效力确定以及当事人在执行和解中权利救济角度方面四个方面提出笔者对完善执行和解制度的构想：第一，明确法官介入和解的程度，并赋予执行法官审查权和监督权；第二，规范和解协议内容和履行期限的限制和“反悔权”的适用，明确任意违反和解协议时的惩罚机制；第三，针对和解协议的效力并在立法上加以确定；第四，确立不安抗辩权制度、申请执行人申请恢复执行制度以及第三人的执行异议权制度。以完善我国民事执行和解制度。
[Abstract]:The system of civil execution reconciliation is an important system in the civil enforcement procedure of our country. It is the embodiment and extension of the principle of party autonomy in the field of execution. It is also the embodiment of the parties' exercising the right of disposition. The enforcement reconciliation means that in the execution procedure, the parties make mutual concessions and reach an agreement on the realization of the legal relationship (right) confirmed by the effective judgment. The settlement agreement will be submitted to the executive court for review and approval in order to suspend or suspend the execution of the procedure or the system. So the enforcement of the settlement has become an important way to close the case. It has great practical value in the judicial practice of our country. The application of enforcement reconciliation can not only reduce the execution cost, but also fully respect the will of the parties. A flexible and convenient way to solve disputes. In our judicial practice, the "difficulty of execution" is a major problem in the implementation, and the existence of the system of enforcement reconciliation can alleviate this problem to a certain extent. It has great theoretical and practical value. But at present, the law of our country in the legislation on the implementation of reconciliation system is simple, so the relevant theory in practice not only can not fully and effectively play its value and role. It even causes some problems in practice. For this reason, the author made a special investigation and study in the first line of judicial work, namely, the people's Court of K City. Based on the investigation of some materials obtained by the author, this paper analyzes the deficiencies of the implementation of reconciliation system in the legislative and practical process, and summarizes some common problems in the practice: first. The rate of execution and settlement of cases is too high, and there are cases of excessive interference of enforcement judges in reconciliation and even forced reconciliation; Secondly, there is confusion in the application of the content and form of the implementation of the settlement agreement; Third, the implementation of reconciliation and efficient settlement of disputes is not effective; 4th, the malicious settlement of the parties exists, the interests of creditors and third parties are infringed. The main reasons for these problems in the operation of this system are four aspects: first. The position of courts and enforcement judges in the enforcement of reconciliation is unclear; Second, there is no clear regulation and strict examination system about the implementation of the settlement agreement. Third, the effectiveness of the implementation of the settlement agreement is not clear; Through the summary of the above problems and the analysis of the causes of the problems, in-depth and comprehensive study of the civil enforcement settlement system, from the court. Enforcement judges in the implementation of the status of reconciliation, the settlement of the agreement to regulate the implementation of matters. The author puts forward the author's conception of perfecting the enforcement settlement system from four aspects: first, it is clear the degree of the judge intervening in the settlement. And endow the executive judge with the power to review and supervise; Second, to regulate the content of the settlement agreement and the limitation of the performance period and the application of the "right of retrogression", and to clarify the punishment mechanism of arbitrary violation of the settlement agreement; Third, the validity of the settlement agreement and legislation to determine; In 4th, the system of uneasiness right of defense was established, the system of application for reinstatement of execution and the system of third party's right of dissent of execution were established to perfect the system of civil execution and reconciliation in our country.
【学位授予单位】：辽宁大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D925.18

【参考文献】