英文摘要 |
In principle, private remedies are prohibited in Taiwan. Therefore, compulsory enforcement is the only way to apply for implementation. But it doesn't have to be a means of sacrificing the debtor's basic rights. In accordance with Article 1 Item 2 of the Compulsory Enforcement Act, which has been in force since 2014: "Compulsory enforcement shall be carried out in accordance with the principles of fairness and reasonableness, balancing the interests of creditors, debtors, and other interested parties, in an appropriate manner, and to the degree no more than necessary to achieve the enforcement purpose." In other words, compulsory enforcement should be based on the principle of fairness and reasonableness, and not exceeding the necessary limits, which has been recognized by legislators. This research focuses on the protection of debtor's rights in the compulsory enforcement Law as the core topic and paying particular attention to the excessive Attachment in Compulsory Enforcement Act of Taiwan, which was stipulated by Article 50: "The attachment of the movable property is limited to the property whose price is sufficient to repay the claim amount under the compulsory enforcement and the costs to be borne by the debtor." Due to shortage of studies in the field of compulsory enforcement in Taiwan, this study try to sort out systematically the relevant judgments of the Supreme Court in the past 20 years, and to clarify the court's judgment standards for the excessive Attachment and the considerations behind them. Especially, the practice has always focused on whether the creditor can obtain the satisfaction of the creditor's rights through compulsory execution. It is easy to ignore the protection of the debtor's rights and interests, leading to the occurrence of illegal compulsory enforcement. This article examines also from a comparative law perspective to introduce the German compulsory enforcement law. |