民法典中的妥善保管义务:制度渊源·重塑再造·法律适用  

A Study on the Obligation of Safe Keeping in the Civil Code:System Origin,Reconstruction,and the Application of Law

作　　者：蒋军洲 JIANG Junzhou(Law School,Henan University,Kaifeng 475001,Henan China)

机构地区：[1]河南大学法学院,河南开封475001

出　　处：《吉首大学学报（社会科学版）》2023年第2期44-58,共15页Journal of Jishou University(Social Sciences)

摘　　要：我国民法典吸收罗马法以降的保管人应尽“为保管之注意”制度,规定保管人应“妥善保管”保管物。但经过民法典的体系性改造,此种“妥善保管”义务已是从客观上要求保管人“维护保管物之安全”,而不是指保管人在保管时应尽“妥善”之注意。将“妥善保管”化约为“为保管之注意”既无文本依据,又与无过错合同责任原则相抵牾。如果保管是无偿的,民法典实际上仍是延续“内尔瓦法”,让无偿保管人尽到管理自己事务的注意,若未尽该注意,他便犯下“重大过失”。但该种重大过失是一种自成一类的具体过失,只归附于无偿保管人的注意,它既不同于抽象重大过失,也有别于具体轻过失。至于民法典为非合同关系所明文规定的妥善保管,以及其他有隐蔽性的默示妥善保管,则应循体系地解释为保管人应就此尽到抽象注意,而不犯各相应层级的抽象过失。Absorbing the institution of the obligation of safe keeping burdened by custodian in Roman Law,the Civil Code of China stipulates that the custodian is obligated to provide custody with due care,and should be diligent to fulfill it.However,after the systematic transformation of the Civil Code,this obligation of "safekeeping" objectively requires the custodian to keep the article,rather than that he should diligently keep it.It has no textual basis and contradicts the principle of no-fault contractual liability to reduce "safekeeping" to "safekeeping attention".If the custody is free,the Civil Code actually continues Lex quod Nerva,allowing the unpaid custodian to manage his own affairs;and if he fails to pay due attention,he will commit a "gross negligence".However,this kind of gross negligence is a kind of specific negligence of its own,which belongs to the attention of the free custodian,different from both abstract gross negligence and concrete minor negligence.As for the safekeeping of the Civil Code which is expressly stipulated in the non-contractual relationship,as well as other implied safekeeping,it should be systematically interpreted as that the custodian should pay attention to the abstract without committing the abstract fault at the corresponding level.

关 键 词：保管义务 保管责任 抽象重大过失 具体重大过失 管理自己事务的注意 

分 类 号：D923[政治法律—民商法学]