等同論否定說：法律行為的可撤銷與相對無效的關係辨析──以《民法通則》到《民法典》的規範發展為基點

The Negation of the Theory of Equation on the Relationship between Voidable Legal Acts and Relatively invalid Legal Acts: Based on the Development of Chinese Civil Law

在我國大陸，有民法學理和司法實務把法律行為的可撤銷與相對無效等同對待，這種等同論值得商榷。從根源上看，等同論紮根于無效等于法律行為效力瑕疵的觀念，但從《民法通則》到《民法典》的規範發展來看，法律行為效力瑕疵形態已多元化，該認識的根基蕩然無存。從內涵上看，等同論的容量不足，效力待定也應歸入相對無效，但這種內涵擴張沒有實益。從效用上看，等同論未顧及無效的全面形態，不僅無法與無效形成區隔，還占用稀缺的術語資源，產生不必要的概念混淆。

in mainland China, both legal theory of civil laws and judicial practices think voidable legal acts are same as relative invalidate legal acts, which is named as the theory of equation, but this view is debatable. From the source, it is based on the theory that invalidation and defects of legal acts are treated equally; however this basic no longer exits since forms for defects of legal effect have been diversified due to the development from General Principles of the Civil Law the Civil Code. From the connotation of the theory of equation, effectiveness-pending should be one form of relative invalidation for its insufficient capacity, while there are no benefits for this expansion. This theory also does not consider full forms of invalidation from the perspective of utility. in this case, it is not only difficult to distinguish from invalidation, but it also abuses scarce terminology resources, thus leads to confusions for concepts.