離婚後子女扶養費負擔之台日實務相異發展──兼論通說所謂「生活保持義務理論」

On the Different Development of Legal Practice Between Taiwan and Japan About Distribution of Child Support Payment Between Divorced Couples: The So-called “Unterhaltspflicht Doctrine” Based on the Prevailing View

夫妻離婚後就未成年子女扶養費之分擔應如何決定？有謂台灣的實務上有五種模式，以依家庭收支調查報告加以計算的方式居多。然而，台灣的扶養法理論其實是以所謂「生活保持義務理論」為主（來自日本的中川理論，將扶養義務區分為生活保持義務與生活扶助義務的扶養義務二分說）。相對於此，實務就扶養費計算基準一事之參酌似乎呈現矛盾，但此理論未能提供適切說明。與此相似，日本亦奉中川理論為通說。實務家在2003年正式提案的「簡易算定表」，仍依中川理論為框架。截至目前為止，簡易算定表已普及日本家事法院之實務，且因其簡易及迅速而頗受實務家好評。但是，受到中川理論影響，簡易算定表亦有僅偏重義務人之最低生存權保障等等理論上之缺點，而受到嚴厲批判。而且簡易算定表包含三階段計算公式與速查表；速查表的難度過高，目前尚難導入。其實扶養之「程度」如何決定的問題上，不需與中川理論做一致之解釋，而應著重權利人之需要與義務人之經濟能力為是。在同時注重權利人與義務人雙方的生存權保障之前提下，先發展計算公式的做法，在台灣實務似較可行。總而言之，實無援用所謂「生活保持義務理論」之必要。

How to determine the distribution of child support payment betweendivorced couples? We already have 5 patterns in our legal practice, and theway of quoting Report on the Survey of Family Income and Expenditure isthe most commonly-used. On the other hand, the doctrine of Support Law inTaiwan basically influenced by the so-called “Unterhaltspflicht Doctrine”(dividing maintenance obligation into Unterhaltspflicht andUnterstützungspflicht by the NAKAGAWA Doctrine which came fromJapan). In contrast, the legal practice shows inconsistent attitudes todetermine the calculation standards of child support payment, but theDoctrine could not give good explanations. Similarly, the NAKAGAWADoctrine is the Prevailing View in Japan. And the Simplified CalculationCriteria officially suggested in 2003 by the law practitioners in Japan still inaccord with the NAKAGAWA Doctrine. Up to now, the SimplifiedCalculation Criteria has widely received in Japanese Family Court, andattracts favorable comments from the law practitioners because of itssimplified idea and fastness. Nevertheless, influenced by the NAKAGAWADoctrine, the Simplified Calculation Criteria has theoretical shortcomingsincluding only laying particular stress on the right of obligor of minimumsubsistence guarantee, which was severely criticized. And the SimplifiedCalculation Criteria contains the Three-Step Calculating Formula and theSimplified Charts. So far the Simplified Charts are too difficult to bereceived. In my opinion, the range of support payment shall be determinedaccording to the needs of the person entitled to support, and the economicability of the person bound to furnish it, not in accord with the Doctrine.Paying attention to the rights of minimum subsistence guarantee of bothobligee and obligor at the same time, we could try to set our ownCalculating Formula to be taken in our legal practice. Anyway, there is noneed to invoke the so-called “Unterhaltspflicht Doctrine”.