中國大陸民事訴訟上一部請求的歷史考察與現實定位

Historical Investigation and Realistic Orientation of a Request in Civil Procedure in China

對一部請求的研究，最早見於德國和日本訴訟法學界。但卻是中國大陸法學界較少涉及的學術領域。隨著司法實踐中當事人對一部請求之訴的不斷提出，催生了學界對當事人一部請求問題進行研討的契機，從而使該問題真正得到中國大陸學界的關注。一部請求是一個複雜而具有爭議的新問題。其複雜之處在於它產生原因及類型的多樣化；其爭議之處在於它並非完全符合訴訟標的理論意旨並一定程度違背一事不再理原則。本文旨在通過分析、總結一部請求的發展歷史和理論依據，為一部請求在中國大陸的提出找尋現實定位。本文主要使用歷史分析法、比較分析法和實證案例分析法，一共分為四個部分。第一部分介紹了一部請求之概念及特徵，並且歸納整合一部請求之訴的類型。第二部分通過回顧一部請求之訴在美國、德國、日本和中國大陸的歷史，分析了一部請求產生的原因。第三部分提出了一部請求的理論困境，並且用訴訟標的等、民事訴訟基本理論和利益衡量原則多角度評析其合理性。第四部分由理論回到實踐，設計回應一部請求的程序規制。其中，特別關注了一部請求的提出，訴訟時效的認定和抵銷方式等問題。本文的重點有三，首先在於本文明確回答了如何避免一部請求前後訴出現矛盾判決的問題。其次，本文基於中國大陸現在對一部請求進行立法不適合的國情，提出了將一部請求作為當事人維權的最後程序選擇。此外，本文用利益衡量原則分析一部請求的合理性及其相關的訴訟時效和抵銷的做法，以實際填補當事人的損害作為判斷標準。 A part of request for research, first seen in Germany and Japan litigation jurisprudence. It is the academic field that is less involved in Chinese jurisprudence. With the continuous introduction of a petition by a litigant in judicial practice, it has given rise to an opportunity for the academic community to discuss the petitioner's request so that the issue can truly attract the attention of the Chinese academic community. A part of request is a complex and controversial ''new'' issue. Its complexity lies in its causes and types of diversification,the controversial part is that it does not fully comply with the purpose of litigation objectives and to some extent contrary to the principle of non bis in idem. The purpose of this paper is to find out the realistic position of a petition filed in China by analyzing and summarizing the development history and theoretical basis of a petition. This article mainly uses the ''historical analysis'', ''comparative analysis'' and ''empirical case analysis'', divided into four parts. The first part introduces the concept and characteristics of a part of request, and summarizes the type of a part of request. The second part analyzes the reasons for a part of request by reviewing the history of a petition in the United States, Germany, Japan and mainland China. The third part puts forward a theoretical dilemma of the request, and uses the litigation objective, the basic theory of the civil litigation and the principle of the benefit measurement to evaluate its rationality from multiple angles. The fourth part of the theory back to practice, designed to respond to a part of request program regulation. Among them, paying particular attention to the issue of a part of request, the limitation of the limitation of action and the method of offset. This article highlights three points, first of all, this article clearly answered the question ''how to avoid a part of request before and after the emergence of contradictions and judgments'' issue. Secondly, based on China's current situation that a part of request is unsuitable for legislation, this article proposes the final procedural choice of using a petition as the victim's rights. In addition, this article analyzes the rationality of a part of request and the related limitation of action and set-off of the claim according to the principle of benefit measurement, and takes the actual damage done by the parties as the criterion.