典权入典的体系归属与制度设计  

Research on the Legislative Proposals of Providing Pawn Right into Chinese Civil Code

作　　者：连光阳 LIAN Guang-yang(Faculty of Law,Xiangtan University,Xiangtan,Hunan 411105,China)

机构地区：[1]湘潭大学法学院

出　　处：《湘潭大学学报（哲学社会科学版）》2019年第4期99-104,共6页Journal of Xiangtan University:Philosophy And Social Sciences

基　　金：国家社会科学基金重大项目“中国民法重述、民法典编纂与社会主义市场经济法律制度的完善研究”(14ZDC018)成果

摘　　要：典权制度是我国固有的传统法律制度,我国《民法典物权编(草案)》却一贯地对其未予规定。在典权案件的审判实践中,立法的缺失容易导致同案异判,这会极大地损害法律的稳定性。事实上,典权的制度构造符合公平原则的精神,典权制度的文化基因虽然已发生变化但并未消失,典权制度功能的独特性不宜被不动产质权所取代,这些可以构成证成典权入典正当性的理由。至于典权如何入典,涉及到体系定位和具体制度安排的技术性问题。从体系上而言,典权宜安排在用益物权编,典权制度之下的法律规范主要包括典权的标的物、典权的设立方式、典权的期限、续典、转典与转租、回赎权、找贴权等主要内容。Pawning right system is a traditional legal system in China,while it has long been neglected in the Draft for Comment of the present Civil Code of China . According to empirical statistics,however,the number of pawning right cases has maintained a relatively stable scale in China in recent years. Due to the lack of legislation,the trial of pawning right cases is likely to lead to different judgments on similar cases,which will greatly impair the stability of the law. Despite the similar case’s needs,there has been a continued controversy among scholars and legislators about whether the pawning rights have been entered into the code. Among those major reasons for opposing the enshrinement is the theoretical inconsistency,which can be refuted by cultural interpretation,system analysis,and teleological discussion in sequence. How to enter the code involves technical issues such as system positioning and specific institutional arrangements. As a whole,the code should be arranged in the system of usufructuary right,and the design of the specific system should fully consider the customs,and the “civil law” in Taiwan is a typical example to be referred to.

关 键 词：典权 典当 不动产质权 回赎权 

分 类 号：DF51[政治法律—民商法学]