連帶債務人中一人和解之效力探究

本文為解決最高法院77 年度第19 次民事庭會議決議（一）肯認當事人在立法擇定的創設性和解之外，亦可成立認定性和解之意旨，使和解債務人之一人與債權人成立和解時，因不同和解類型所導致連帶債務外部與內部關係之效力歧異，先自連帶債務人的債務履行牽引性（performance of contract）出發，整理連帶債務外部與內部連帶關係之學說理論，探求連帶債務免除的特殊性質，再進行和解契約之解構，瞭解其定義及性質、效力、種類與判別標準，尋求和解契約在連帶債務履行之性質與角色，最後以各該結論為基礎，輔以目前最高法院見解，尋求具有體系的邏輯思考道路，並進行實例演算，俾利紛爭之解決。

關鍵字

連帶債務；一部和解；創設性和解；免除；求償權；認定性和解

並列摘要

The primary purpose of this article is to analyze the Supreme Court's 19th resolution of 1988 (civil), which confirms that parties of civil litigations are entitled to reach ＂settlement of acceptance＂ (a settlement based on the original legal relationship), apart from ＂settlement of innovation＂ (a settlement creating a different legal relationship replacing the original one). The analysis starts from a discussion on the traction relationship arising from joint-debtors' clearance of debt, followed by combing theories of exterior and interior relationships of joint-debtors, examining exemption of joint debt, deconstructing elements of settlement, and reconstructing the definition, nature, effect and distinguishing criteria of settlement. The article finally suggests a systematic and logic approach to resolve controversies over joint-debt settlement on the basis of above discussions and the latest Supreme Court's interpretations, as well as provides several examples for further practical analysis.

並列關鍵字

Join-Debt ； A Part of Settlement ； Settlement of Innovation ； Exemption ； Claims ； Settlement of Acceptance

參考文獻

立法院（1999），〈院會紀錄〉，《立法院公報》，88 卷13 期（上），頁252-513。臺北：立法院。

Google Scholar

Ministry of Justice, Japan (2009), Civil Code (Part I, Part II, and Part III),http://www.japaneselawtranslation.go.jp/law/detail/?ft=2&re=01&dn=1&yo=%E6%B0%91%E6%B3%95&x=0&y=0&ia=03&ky=&page=3 (last visited: 2016/4/5).