論代償請求權

Analysis of Claim for Substitute Benefits

以最高法院105年度台上字第2111號民事判決為引子，拋出幾個亟待再解構與再建構之課題，即是代償請求權本質、要件與替代利益返還範圍等問題。代償請求權之正當化事由，透過比較法之梳理、關照我國權益歸屬保護配置之法秩序和探索債之本質，勾勒出代償請求權蘊藏著雙層基調：一是以調整債之相對性所生之不當財貨分配為目的，另一是以現實履行債為目的。在調整不當財貨分配與敦促債之現實履行價值導向下，代償請求權成立要件之嚴格性要求也漸次鬆動，諸如：代償請求權不僅適用於給付有體性、無體性標的和供與義務，也及於作為與不作為義務；鬆綁給付不能之標尺；弱化替代利益與不能須限於同一原因事由之要求；淡化原給付標的與替代利益嚴格同一性之判定。最後，代償請求權之返還範圍，本文則對照英美法對違約獲利返還責任形成基礎與德國學理發展脈絡，並反饋我國代償請求權之正當化基礎，在債務人故意侵害債權因此獲利之情況下，債權人應得請求債務人讓與或交付之代替利益或獲利之全部。至於債務人非因故意致給付不能而因此獲得替代利益，債權人依代償請求權得請求返還範圍，以債權人原應取得具體債權內容，與不法轉換為債務人所支配之財產間之同一性為論斷。

"According to the Supreme Court Civil Judgment 105 Tai-Shang-Tzu 2111, there are still a number of controversial questions to clarify regarding the nature, essentials, and scope of the return of substitute benefits claim. Based on attribution theory on rights and interests in Taiwan Civil Code, the claim for substitute benefits has two multi-characteristics. The claim for return of substitute benefits can be interpreted not only a parallel to the law of unjust enrichment, but also a function to promote the fulfillment of the duty to perform debt. Under guidance of two multi-characteristics for return of substitute benefits claim, the elements of the claim have gradually loosened, such as the scope of application of the claim an object not only to tangible, intangible objects and right, but also to action and omission. Meanwhile, the purpose of the claim is to loosen the standard of impossibility, to weaken the requirement of direct causal link between the replacement benefit and the release reason of the performance obligation, to adjust the criteria for the same identity of the owned and substitute benefits. Finally, regarding the dispute about the scope of claim for substitute benefits this article will focus on comparing the scholarship and legal practice in the field of equitable compensation and disgorgement of profit in Anglo-American law und German civil law, in order to find an appropriate balance with regard to incorrect distribution of profit in our law system."