 |
English
|
正體中文
|
简体中文
|
Post-Print筆數 : 27 |
Items with full text/Total items : 111316/142225 (78%)
Visitors : 48382407
Online Users : 663
|
|
|
Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/96788
|
| Title: | 夫妻間之贈與及自由處分金於法定財產制下剩餘財產分配之處理—— 我國民法第一○三○條之一第一項及第一○一八條之一與德國、瑞士民法相關規範之比較研究 |
| Other Titles: | The Effect of Donations Between Spouses and the Effect of Payment of Money for Free Disposal by the Distribution of Surplus of Matrimonial Assets under the Statutory Matrimonial Property Regime— A Comparative Study of Art. 1030 a paragraph 1 and Art. 1018 a of the Civil Code of Taiwan with the Relevant Provisions in the German BGB and the Swiss ZGB |
| Authors: | 林易典
Lin, Yi-Tien |
| Keywords: | 法定財產制;民法第一○三○條之一;剩餘財產分配;無償取得;夫妻間贈與;自由處分金;剩餘財產分配預付;民法第一○一八條之一
Statutory Matrimonial Property regime;Art. 1030 a of the Civil Code;Distribution of Surplus of Matrimonial Assets;Gratuitous Acquisition;Donation Between Spouses;Money for Free Disposal;Prepayment of Distribution of Surplus of Matrimonial Assets;Art. 1018 a of the Civil Code |
| Date: | 2010-12 |
| Issue Date: | 2016-05-20 16:05:15 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 我國民法法定財產制之規範於一九八五年修正時，導入第一○三○條之一夫妻之剩餘財產分配請求權規範，並經二○○二年、二○○七年之修正。本文首先分析比較德國民法第一三八○條及瑞士民法第一六四條之規範與實務。其次並分析我國民法第一○三○條之一第一項但書第一款之適用原則及相關實務。於剩餘財產分配規範下，依第一○三○條之一第一項但書第一款之規定，「無償取得」之財產被排除於分配標的之範圍外。如夫妻一方於婚後自他方收受贈與物，因贈與本屬無償行為，因之所取得之財產仍構成此一「無償取得」，而無庸提供分配。不應因受贈人曾有婚姻共同生活犧牲及貢獻，及贈與人具有配偶之身分，贈與之取得即被視為家務貢獻之代價而為有償，而須提供分配。此外，依二○○二年增訂之第一○一八條之一「自由處分金」條款，夫妻間得協議支付一定數額之金錢，供他方自由處分。如將「自由處分金」之支付或受領解釋為剩餘財產分配之預付或預先受領，此過度擬制夫妻當事人之意思，且實際上創造出新的剩餘財產分配方式之效果，有違現行第一○三○條之一第一項法律所允許之分配方式。如夫妻間之自由處分金協議中，並無對待給付或對價關係之契約約定時，其無償性仍應被肯認，使受領之一方於法定財產制關係消滅時無庸提供分配，不僅能自由處分，亦能終局保有，並而能符合當事人間自由處分金給付時，無另外透過剩餘財產交互參與分配過程，取回其剩餘之半數的本意。
In 1985 the equalization claim of the spouse for surplus of matrimonial assets, Art. 1030 a, was introduced into the statutory matrimonial property regime of Taiwan. This provision was modified in 2002 and 2007. This article is a comparative study of the provisions of § 1380 of the German Civil Code (BGB) and Art. 164 of the Swiss Civil Code (ZGB) and analysis of their practices. Besides, this article analyses the principles to apply Art. 1030 a paragraph 1 No.1 of the Civil Code of Taiwan and its practices. The “gratuitously acquired” assets are excluded from the scope of the object of distribution according to the provision of distribution of surplus of matrimonial assets, i.e., Art. 1030 a, paragraph 1, No. 1. If one party of the spouses accepted a donated object from the other party of the spouses, this shall still constitute the above-mentioned “gratuitous acquired” asset and does not have to be provided for distribution. The acquired asset, owing to donation from the other party of the spouses, should not be regarded as the price of contribution. It should not constitute “paid acquired” and does not need to be provided for distribution, even though the donee has sacrificed for and contributed to the common family life and the donor has a status of spouse. According to Art. 1018 a, amended in 2002, the spouses may also reach an agreement such that one spouse pays a designated amount of money to another spouse for his/her free disposal. If the transaction of money for free disposal is interpreted as the prepayment of distribution of surplus of matrimonial assets, this excessively constitutes the will of the spouses and actually leads to the creation of a new model of distribution of matrimonial assets which under Art. 1030 a, paragraph 1 will not be permitted. If the agreement of money for free disposal does not contain the obligation of counter-performance or the relationship as a counter-performance, the gratuitous character of acquisition of money for free disposal should be recognized. This enables the acquired party not to have to provide acquisition for distribution while the statutory matrimonial property regime perishes. He/She can therefore be finally free to both dispose and preserve. The true will of the spouse who made payment of money for free disposal can also be met, because he/she does not intend to claim back half of the amount of surplus of this payment by way of process of cross distribution of matrimonial assets. |
| Relation: | 法學評論, 118, 1-104 |
| Data Type: | article |
| Appears in Collections: | [Chengchi law review ] Journal Articles
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 118(001-104).pdf | 868Kb | Adobe PDF2 | 3216 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏，無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用，惟仍請適度，合理使用本網站之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，則請先取得著作權人之授權。
The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.
2.本網站之製作，已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益，如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，請權利人通知本網站維護人員(
nccur@nccu.edu.tw)，維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(
nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
