《民法典》第1000条(侵害人格权民事责任)诉讼评注  

Procedural Commentary on Article 1000 of the Civil Code(Civil Liability of Infringement on the Personality Right)

作　　者：郭小冬 Guo Xiaodong

机构地区：[1]天津大学法学院,天津300072

出　　处：《法学杂志》2023年第3期33-48,共16页Law Science Magazine

基　　金：2022年度国家社会科学基金重大项目“民法典与民事诉讼法的协同实施研究”(项目编号:22&ZD206)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：诉讼请求、诉讼标的、判决主文与实体请求权相关,是实体请求权在诉讼程序中的转化呈现。但此相关性在我国诉讼实践中未能得到充分的体现。赔礼道歉的不可替代性和不可执行性使其成为《民法典》第1000条诉讼落实的障碍。法官可以借助比例原则来判定被告应承担的民事责任。赔礼道歉应当被鼓励,但不应该也无法被强制。当被告抗拒赔礼道歉时,消除影响、恢复名誉并辅以精神抚慰金比赔礼道歉更符合第1款的“相当”性要求。第2款规定的公告或公布判决书以消除影响、恢复名誉属于替代执行。是否采用此种措施应由法院的执行机构依照比例原则决定,并要充分尊重权利人的程序选择权。立法机关应当重新审视赔礼道歉作为人格权请求权内容和民事责任的必要性与可行性。The claim,the object and the conclusion of the judgment are related to the right of substantive claim.But the relation has not been watched in our litigation practice.The irreplaceability and unenforceability of the apology make it an obstacle to the implementation of Article 1000 of the Civil Code.The principle of proportionality can be used to determine the civil liability of the defendant.Apologies should be encouraged,but should not and cannot be f mandatory.When the defendant refuses to make an apology,eliminating the impact,restoring the reputation and supplementing it with emotional compensation are more proportionate to the equivalent.A public announcement is fungible execution.Whether to adopt such measures shall be decided by the court's executive agencies and fully respecting the right of procedural choice of the litigant.The legislative body should re-examine the necessity and feasibility of the apology as the content of claim right of personality and civil liability.

关 键 词：诉讼请求 判决主文 赔礼道歉 比例原则 执行措施 

分 类 号：D923[政治法律—民商法学]