- 期刊
民法第八十八條意思表示錯誤之類型與界限
The Types and the Limits of "Expression of Intention Mistakes" in Article 88 of the Civil Law
摘要
意思表示錯誤，因涉及表意人真意之尊重與相對人信賴之保障此二民法重要課題，因而，於何種情況應該允許為錯誤意思表示之表意人撤銷其意思表示，乃一頗費斟酌之衡量。民法第八十八條規定意思表示錯誤，學者與司法實務均認第一項為「內容錯誤」與「表示行為錯誤」，第二項之規定則為「性質錯誤」；然而關於其界限之論述模糊。關於動機錯誤之範圍，學者間之見解尚非一致，我國學者多從德國通說之見解，認為性質錯誤係動機錯誤，因民法第八十八條第二項特別規定，而例外得撤銷；亦有學者認為性質錯誤原本即為內容錯誤，民法第八十八條第二項之規定僅為訓示規定。本文釐清內容錯誤係發生於意思表示主觀要素之效果意思部分，表示行為錯誤乃發生於意思表示之客觀要素表示行為部分，二者可清晰區分其概念；並主張民法第八十八條第二項之性質錯誤之本質即為內容錯誤。此見解固擴大對內容錯誤之認定範圍，然而我國意思表示錯誤之撤銷要件與德國不同，須表意人無過失始得為之，此無過失之要件適當限制意思表示錯誤之撤銷，本文見解無不當危害交易安全之虞，有助釐清錯誤之範圍。
並列摘要
”Expression of intention mistakes” concerns the respect for the intention declaration of the declarer and trust in the opposite party, and is an important issue in the Civil Law, thus, the situations to be accepted as ”expression of intention mistakes” for cancellation of the declaration of the declarer is worth discussing. ”Expression of intention mistakes” is referred in Article 88 of the Civil Law. Both scholars and juridical practitioners suggest that the first item should be ”content mistakes” and ”behavioral mistakes”, while the second item should be ”mistakes of the nature”. However, the discourses on the definitions are vague. Scholars held different views on the scope of ”motive mistakes”. Based on the German general principles, scholars of Taiwan suggest that ”mistakes of the nature” is ”motive mistakes”. According to Clause 2 of Article 88 of the Civil Law, it can be cancelled on exemption. Some scholars suggested that ”characteristics mistakes” was originally ”content mistakes”, and Clause 2 of Article 88 of the Civil Law is merely an instruction. This paper attempts to clarify that ”content mistakes” occur on the ”result meaning” of the subjective factor of the ”expression”, and ”behavioral mistakes” occur on the behavioral part of the objective factor. The definitions of the two can be clearly differentiated. And this paper argues that the nature of the ”characteristics mistakes” is ”content mistakes” in Clause 2 of Article 88 of the Civil Law. This proposition expands the identification of the scope of ”content mistakes”. The cancellation conditions of ”expression of intention mistakes” are different than those in Germany, namely, the declarers need to be proven non-fault. The non-fault condition reasonably restricts the cancellation of ”expression of intention mistakes”. This paper explains the safety of non-improper hazardous transaction, in order to clarify the scope of mistakes.