違反契約之非財產上損害賠償之研究

The Research of Mental Distress Damages for Breach of Contract

何家誠(Chia-Cheng Ho)

指導教授 ： 郭玲惠

國立臺北大學/法律學院/法律學系/碩士(2009年)

摘要

國立臺北大學九十八學年度第一學期碩士學位論文提要
論文題目：違反契約之非財產上損害賠償之研究 論文頁數：244
所　組　別：法律學系碩士班法專組 學號：79486010
研　究　生：何家誠 指導教授：郭玲惠 博士
論文提要內容：
非財產上損害，可來自財產權或非財產權受侵害，然而財產權受侵害致生之非財產上損害，在我國民法第十八條第二項採限制主義下，實務與通說認為其尚難以請求損害賠償。故本文所謂非財產上之損害，專指侵害非財產權，也就是人格權與身分權所致生之精神上或肉體上之痛苦。非財產上損害之訴請損害賠償，也就是慰撫金的請求，其於我國民法之相關規定，在早期請求要件限於因侵權行為致生之非財產上損害，且客體亦陷於狹隘的特別人格權，導致不公平的情事橫生。所幸在民國八十八年債編修正後，慰撫金不僅在請求客體上大幅擴張，而從特別人格權邁向一般人格權，甚至是身分法益。更因民法第二二七條之一的增訂，使得非財產上損害賠償之請求要件，正式從侵權行為，擴張及於債務不履行。然而，新法的增訂，卻僅規定因債務不履行致生之非財產上之損害，法律效果準用侵權行為之相關規定，內容可謂相當簡陋。換句話說，侵權行為與債務不履行兩種截然不同的規範，於請求慰撫金之法律效果與範圍上沒有兩樣，其中可能衍生的問題，以及如何尋求修正的方法，皆是本文研究之目的所在。

本文以民法第二二七條之一為重心，且將債務不履行範圍，限縮至吾人日常生活最密切之「契約」關係加以切入，討論債務人之契約不履行侵害債權人之人身權致生非財產上損害相關問題，藉由我國實務學說與美國法上相關實務學說研究比較，探討民法第二二七條之一本身條文的缺點、實務上可能衍生的問題並提供修正的方向，以及民法第二二七條之一的行使主體與保護客體的爭議論述與釐清。

關鍵字

關鍵字：非財產上損害、債務不履行、民法第二二七條之一、慰撫金、契約不履行

並列摘要

ABSTRACT
The Research of Mental Distress Damages for Breach of Contract
By
Ho, Chia-cheng
January 2009

ADVISOR(S)：Dr. Kuo, Ling-Hwei
DEPARTMENT：DEPARTMENT OF LAW
MAJOR：CIVIL LAW
DEGREE：MASTER OF LAWS

The non-property damages may come from the infringements of property or the non-property rights. However, the former could not claim damages under our Civil law. In other words, our courts only acknowledge and award the non-pecuniary loss from personality or status rights which was injured by the defendant. Before 88th year of the Republic Era, it is pretty constricted that our courts only award mental distress damages in tort case. And the protection of the objects even limit to few special personality rights. Fortunately, after the Civil law amending in the 88th year of the Republic Era, we got to the general personality rights across the special ones. The request of the Elements to claim non-pecuniary loss is no longer limit to tort, but also the debtor's non-performance. Although the law amending is in the right direction, it is not flawless. Cause the law simply regulate the legal effect of the debtor's non-performance should keep in compliance mutatis mutandis with the tort provisions. Therefore there might be problems in the simple law article.

This thesis focus on the Civil Code Article 227-1, and limit the debtor's non-performance to the contract. Try to discuss the related issues that the debtor breach of contract against the creditor's personality right which caused creditor's non-pecuniary loss. Comparing our jurisdiction opinions and scholars theories with the united states', and to explore the shortcomings of the Civil Code Article 227-1. Inferring the possibly practical problems from the facts, and providing the direction of the law Amending. Moreover, the author try to expound the controversial issues from the Civil Code Article 227-1's subject of rights and protection of objects and make it clear.

並列關鍵字

Key words：breach of contract, mental suffering, non-pecuniary loss, the Civil Code Article 227-1

參考文獻

施啟揚，從個別人格權到一般人格權，台大法學論叢，第4卷第1期，1972年12月。

陳計男，人格權之侵害與損害賠償案例之研究，法令月刊，第25卷第3期，1974年3月。

孫森焱，論非財產上損害之賠償，法令月刊，第29卷第4期，1978年4月。

DAVID CAPPER, DAMAGES FOR DISTRESS AND DISAPPOINTMENT--THE LIMITS OF WATTS V. MORROW, 116 L.Q.R. 553 (2000).

DAVID J. LEIBSON, RECOVERY OF DAMAGES FOR EMOTIONAL DISTRESS CAUSED BY PHYSICAL INJURY TO ANOTHER, 15 J. FAM. L. 163 (1977).