赃物的善意取得制度研究

发布时间：2018-02-03 19:13

本文关键词： 赃物善意取得救济　出处：《安徽大学》2017年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：善意取得是指对某财物没有处分权利的人违反法律规定将其转让给第三者,如果受让该财物的买受人取得该物的所有权时系出于善意,那么他便可以成为该财物的所有权人。该制度是伴随着商品经济的发展,为适应商品交换的需要而产生的一项重要的民事制度。在其发展史上,占有脱离物能否适用善意取得一直都是一个十分重要的问题,尤其是赃物的善意取得问题更是难以解决。针对这个问题的法律规定只存在于刑法领域的司法解释当中,而在《物权法》里,确将赃物排除在善意取得的适用范围外,未能予以明确其法律属性,因此在实践中适用时,可能会因不同地区的司法部门对司法解释理解的差异导致不同的判决结果。赃物的善意取得问题,其实就是对于追缴的赃物的所有权归属于刑事被害人还是归属于善意第三人的问题,该问题所产生的法律关系本质上是属于民事领域的,所以应当由民法,尤其是物权法来进行规范。赃物适用善意取得后不可避免的会出现一定的法律效果,总是会导致某个权利人的权益被侵害,而这个时候在相关权利人的合法权益受到侵害时,应当适用怎样的法律救济途径才能更好的平衡整体利益也是一个很重要的问题。善意取得制度目的在于平衡原权利人与善意第三人之间的利益,而该制度的实施,必然会造成反射性的后果,那就是权利人失权,当然如果剥夺一方的权利,而其又得不到相应的赔偿,这显然是与民法中的公平原则不相符的。该制度虽然在一定程度上使原权利人的利益得不到保护,但维护了交易安全和市场经济秩序。这个整体利益,当然高于原权利人的个别利益,所以应该优先保护。在当前市场经济高速发展的今天,随着交易行为的日益频繁,构建一个针对赃物善意取得问题的制度体系迫在眉睫。因此要尽快完善善意取得制度及其相关法律的建立和健全,比如赃物适用善意取得制度的具体构成要件以及权利人救济程序的具体构建,从其立法制度上剖析使其能够更好有效的适应当今社会经济发展需求。《物权法》作为基本法,要承担其应有的使命,对赃物的权利最终归属作出明确的规定,尤其是在善意的认定标准上加以严格界定,同时对回复请求权行使的确定一个合适的期间,最后对不适用善意取得的特定物品的范围要出详细具体的规定。公民知情权的保障和实现是现代文明社会的重要特征之一,而在涉案财物处理中程序不公开,造成在程序上无法充分保障第三人的合法权益。我国法律没有规定在第三人权益可能受到侵害的时候司法机关负有告知义务,所以我国并没有专门的保护善意第三人的诉讼程序,鉴于此,笔者对权利人救济的程序进行了设想,提出了具体的构建建议,为我国法制建设尽一份绵薄之力。
[Abstract]:Bona fide acquisition refers to a person who does not have the right to dispose of a property and transfers it to a third party in violation of the law. If the buyer of the property has acquired the ownership of the property, it is out of good faith. Then he can become the owner of the property. The system is accompanied by the development of the commodity economy, in order to meet the needs of commodity exchange and an important civil system. It has always been a very important question whether good faith acquisition can be applied to possession separation. In particular, the problem of bona fide acquisition of stolen goods is even more difficult to solve. The legal provisions for this problem only exist in the judicial interpretation in the field of criminal law, and in the "property Law". It is true that the stolen goods are excluded from the scope of application of bona fide acquisition, and the legal attributes of the stolen goods are not clear, so they are applicable in practice. Different judicial interpretations may lead to different decisions. The problem of the bona fide acquisition of stolen goods may be caused by the differences of judicial interpretation in different regions. In fact, the ownership of the stolen goods is attributed to the criminal victim or the third party in good faith. The legal relationship generated by the problem is essentially a civil field, so it should be civil law. In particular, the property law to regulate. Stolen goods in good faith will inevitably be acquired after a certain legal effect, will always lead to a right of the rights and interests of the infringement. And at this time when the legitimate rights and interests of the relevant rights and interests are infringed. What kind of legal remedy should be applied in order to better balance the overall interests is also a very important issue. The purpose of bona fide acquisition system is to balance the interests between the original right holder and the bona fide third party. And the implementation of the system will inevitably lead to reflexive consequences, that is, the right holders lose their rights, of course, if deprived of the rights of one party, and it can not get the corresponding compensation. This is obviously inconsistent with the principle of fairness in civil law. Although to some extent, the system does not protect the interests of the original right holders, it maintains the transaction security and the order of the market economy. Of course higher than the original rights of the individual interests, so should be given priority to protect. In the current rapid development of the market economy today, with the increasingly frequent trading behavior. It is urgent to construct a system to solve the problem of bona fide acquisition of stolen goods. Therefore, it is necessary to improve the establishment and perfection of bona fide acquisition system and related laws as soon as possible. For example, the specific components of the bona fide acquisition system and the specific construction of the relief procedures of the obligee are applicable to the stolen goods. From its legislative system analysis to make it better and more effective to meet the needs of today's social and economic development. As a basic law, it should undertake its due mission, and make clear provisions on the rights of stolen goods. Especially in the bona fide identification criteria to be strictly defined, at the same time the exercise of the right to respond to the request to determine a suitable period. Finally, the scope of the specific goods that do not apply in good faith should be specified in detail. The protection and realization of the citizen's right to know is one of the important characteristics of modern civilized society, but the procedure of handling the property involved in the case is not open. As a result, the legal rights and interests of the third party can not be fully protected in the procedure. The law of our country does not stipulate that when the rights and interests of the third party may be infringed, the judicial organ has the obligation to inform. Therefore, there is no special litigation procedure to protect bona fide third party in our country. In view of this, the author conceives the procedure of relief to the obligee, puts forward concrete construction suggestions, and makes a modest contribution to the construction of legal system in our country.
【学位授予单位】：安徽大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D923.2

【参考文献】