본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

关于中国民事诉讼和解制度的研究

A Study on the System of Settlement in Court in China

2

조회

0

다운로드

0

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

초록

中国社会素以和为贵,和解有广泛而深厚的传统文化基础. 即使在诉讼过程中,也存在大量达成诉讼和解的情形. 但在中国诉讼和解仅仅是私法合同,不具有既判力和强制执行力,也不是一种独立的结案方式,只能以请求法院制作调解书、撤回起诉或撤回上诉的方式结案. 以调解书结案存在着名实不符、给法官“以判压调”提供空间的弊端;而以撤诉结案则存在着违反民事诉讼“适正、公平、经济、迅速”理念的弊端. 这样的情况即使在2015年2月中国最高人民法院颁布了《关于适用<中华人民共和国民事诉讼法>的解释》,对撤回起诉的要件进行调整之后,依然如此. 本文主要结合中国的立法以及司法实务中存在的问题分析诉讼和解的缺陷和不足,并在借鉴其他国家、地区诉讼和解制度的基础上,提出对策:中国应当赋予诉讼和解以独立的终结诉讼效力和强制执行力,并在存在实体法瑕疵时提供救济.

Abstract

Since ancient times Chinese society has paid more attention to the principle or concept of harmony, so the idea of reconciliation is deeply rooted in Chinese traditional culture. Even during court proceedings, numerous parties reach settlements in court. But in China such settlements are matters of private law and do not have the force of res judicata and executive force, nor does it close litigation by itself. If the parties reach a settlement in court they can only end the litigation by requesting the court to write a conciliation statement for them, or by withdrawing the litigation or the appeal. The former solution has problems as followings: The form of conciliation statement doesn’t meet with the content of settlement in court; it provides room for judges to settle the case by their will. And the latter solution also has problems, because it violates the principle of civil procedure—“just, quick and cheap”. Although the system of withdrawal is adjusted in “Interpretation on the Application of the ‘Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China’” issued by the Supreme Court of China in February 2015, the situations aren’t changed. Combined with legislative and judicial practice in China, this paper pointed out problems and defects in the Chinese system of court settlement, analyzed the system in other countries and districts, and also suggested the solution for improving the system in China. The law should provide the element, process, and effect of settlement, especially it should provide that if the parties reach a settlement in court, the litigation is over, and the settlement in court has executive force. If there are some substantive legal flaws in settlement in court, then these should be sued again.

참고문헌 (33)

  1. 杜万华, "最高人民法院民事诉讼法司法解释实务指南" (2015), 中国法制出版社
  2. 罗森贝克, "德国民事诉讼法(下)" (2007), 中国法制出版社
  3. 梁书文, "民事诉讼法适用意见新解" (2002), 中国法制出版社
  4. 李木贵, "民事诉讼法(下)" (2010), 元照出版社
  5. 棚濑孝雄, "纠纷的解决和审判制度" (1994), 中国政法大学出版社
  6. 孙汉琦, "韩国民事诉讼法导论" (2010), 中国法制出版社
  7. 王甲乙, "民事诉讼法新论" (2000), 三民书局
  8. 王福华, "民事诉讼专题研究" (2007), 法律出版社
  9. 中村英郎, "新民事诉讼法讲义" (2001), 法律出版社
  10. 陈薇, "民事诉讼法经典" (2011), 大龙海文化事业公司
  11. 沈德咏, "最高人民法院民事诉讼法司法解释理解与适用" (2015), 人民法院出版社
  12. 汉斯, "德国民事诉讼法基础教程" (2005), 中国政法大学出版社
  13. 孔金萍, "中韩民事诉讼法撤诉制度比较研究", 중국법연구, 23, pp.159~174 (2015), 한중법학회
  14. 林剑锋, "设定与限制:论民事上诉审中的撤诉", 中外法学, (3) (2015)
  15. 李浩, "当下法院调解中一个值得警惕的现象——调解案件大量进入强制执行研究", 法学, (1) (2012)
  16. 邓汉德, "诉讼和解制度初探", 河南社会科学, (5) (2000)
  17. 李海涛, "论民事二审程序中原告申请撤回起诉的几个问题", 法律适用, (2) (2011)
  18. "本案中原告是否有权在二审撤回起诉"[URL]
  19. 人民司法研究组, "本案应执行一审生效判决还是二审达成的和解协议", 人民司法, (13) (2009)
  20. 贺剑, "诉讼外和解的实体法基础——评最高人民法院指导案例2号", 法学, (3) (2013)
  21. 丁亮华, "执行和解制度若干问题研究", 人民司法, (12) (2006)
  22. 刘海红, "旅行执行和解协议中申请执行人反悔的处理", 人民法院报 (2008)
  23. 汤维建, "论民事执行程序的契约化——以执行和解为分析中心", 政治与法律, (1) (2006)
  24. 张永泉, "执行前和解协议法律效力研究", 法学家, (1) (2011)
  25. 胡岩, "论司法错误与司法责任——兼论“错案追究制”的正当性", 法律适用, (3) (2011)
  26. 孙汉琦, "中国民事诉讼法之原理与解释" (2014), 弘文社
  27. Kim Hong-kyu, "新民事诉讼法" (2011), 三英社
  28. Lee Si-yoon, "新民事诉讼法" (2008), 博英社
  29. 金洪烨, "民事诉讼法", ~ (2010)
  30. 孔金萍, "论中国执行和解合同之效力与救济措施研究", 法曹, 통권 : 687 (2013)
  31. Oh Soo-won, "债权人撤销权范围内的诉讼和解", 法曹, 통권 : 678 (2013)
  32. 高桥志宏, "民事诉讼法——制度与理论的深层分析(上)" (2005), 有斐阁
  33. 新堂幸司, "新民事诉讼法" (2009), 弘文堂

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (13건)