消費者后悔權的行使與發展研究-藏刊網

本篇論文目錄導航：

【題目】消費者后悔權的行使與發展研究
【引言】消費者后悔權面臨的問題探究引言
【第一章】消費者反悔權的概念界定
【2.1】消費者反悔權的適用范圍
【2.2】消費者后悔權的適用例外
【3.1 3.2】新消法適用及消費者退貨欺詐及其預防
【3.3】拓寬和改進消費者救濟渠道
【結論/參考文獻】消費者后悔權使用困境探析結論與參考文獻

摘要

消費者“反悔權”（又稱“后悔權”）是在市場經濟發展到一定條件下產生的一種新型民事權利，對保護消費者合法權益具有十分重大的意義。這項權利被很多學者認為是突破了傳統民法中“有約必守原則”（pacta sunt servanda），所以無論是在歐盟消費者保護指令向內國法轉化、德國“債法改革”中將其編入民法典，還是在我國《消費者權益保護法》的首次修訂中，都引起了廣大的爭鳴。我國臺灣地區“消費者保護法”也規定有消費者反悔權，并在司法實踐中暴露了一些問題，業已進入“立法院”的修改程序。

從歷史的角度來看，我國的消費者保護水平相較西方發達國家一直相差較遠。經修訂的《中華人民共和國消費者權益保護法》于 2014年 3 月 15 日正式生效施行，使得從法律規定的文字本身，到隨之而來的經營者修改服務條款現象，都為這項權利的研究提供了新的素材。

本文將對這項權利的基本理論進行探討，通過比較國內外這項制度的具體規定、國內外經營者的應對措施，進一步分析該權利的行使條件與發展方向，以及這項權利目前面臨的問題，并在論述中穿插對我國《消保法》中相關條款的評議。

文章的第一部分將對這項權利進行界定。由于學界針對這樣一項“消費者退回購買商品，經營者返還其價金”的特殊權利，使用了不同的稱呼，這便意味著在對這項權利的認識上存在不同。德國法學者認為該權利是撤回意思表示的權利，從其民法典的規定，使用了消費者“撤回權”這一概念。我國臺灣地區立法者在其“消費者保護法”中將之描述為“解除契約”,認為是合同解除權。我國《消費者權益保護法》中使用的是“退貨”二字，因此也有人認為是無因退貨權。筆者贊同一些學者所使用的“反悔權”,因為前幾種命名不符合我國《合同法》對撤回、撤銷、解除的定義，而“無因退貨權”又有縮小權利行使對象的嫌疑。此外，反悔權這一表述本身也有其獨到的優點。

隨后文章將在第二部分分析這項權利的使用條件，包括該權利的適用范圍與例外。此部分主要從兩個方面展開，一是根據交易方式，如經營者與消費者是借助了遠程科技手段，還是面對面在何種場所訂立合同，均會對這項權利的產生與行使產生不同影響；另一方面是根據商品類型的不同，比如承載了知識產權的實體商品、經互聯網直接下載的虛擬商品等，探討它們是否能夠適用反悔權。

第三部分即是現階段我國規定的消費者反悔權所遇到的問題，主要有新《消保法》第 25 條第 2 款規定下帶來的代購與拍賣排除反悔權是否合理。蓋網上代購作為一種新興的購物形式，對于代購行為、代購物品的不同判定會讓反悔權的行使發生變化。網上拍賣在中國也逐漸參與者眾，多地法院甚至與“淘寶網”展開合作，進行網上司法拍賣，其中也會帶來反悔權的適用問題。此部分還論及了退貨欺詐及預防問題。因為不僅僅在中國，即使在公民素質較高、建有完備誠信體系的發達國家，也存在各種各樣的退貨欺詐。如何避免權利濫用也因此構成了反悔權中的重要議題。最后筆者提出了構建“網絡經營者誠信信息系統”以改進消費者救濟渠道的設想。

文章最后一部分是本文的結論，對全文觀點做出提煉，進行總括，得出結論。

關鍵詞：消費者反悔權，消費者權益保護法，臺灣消費者保護法，德國民法典

ABSTRACT

The right of revocation by consumers is a newly developed civil rightin a relatively mature market economy environment and plays animportantrole in protecting consumer rights and interests. Many scholars treat thisright as it has broken the “pacta sunt servanda” principle of traditionalcontract law,which leads to many discussions in reform of the German lawof obligationsunder the harmonisation between European Union directivesand domestic law, and also in China's consumer protection law amendment.

This right is also seen in “Consumer Protection Law” of Taiwan China andsome problems have been exposed during its practice and exercise, makingit now under the amendment procedure by “Legislative Yuan”.

Viewing historically, the consumer protection standard of China hasfallen far behind the western developed countries. Since March 15, 2014,the newly revised Law of the People's Republic of China on the Protectionof Consumer Rights and Interests has come into force and it has providedus with new materials for study from the law itself to the reactions ofbusiness participants.

This thesis is to research on the basic theory of this right by making acomparision of detailed regulations originated from this kind of right andmeasures taken by the sellers in response to this right both foreign anddomestic, and to further analyse the conditions and terms for using and thedevelop direction of this right. It will also focus on the problems happenedin the real word and give evaluations of China's latest legislation on thisfield.

The first part of this thesis will try to definite this right as the scholars usedifferent names to refer to this right which means there are differentunderstandings behind it. The german jurist use “right of withdraw” whilethey treat it as a right to withdraw the declaration of will. The lawmakers ofTaiwan, China describe it as a right to cancel a contract in its ConsumerProtection Law. The Chinese law uses “return of goods” and makes it anon-reason right of return. The writer agrees with the saying of “right ofrevocation” used by some scholars because the foresaid “withdraw” and“cancel” are not consist with their definitions in China's Contract Law.

Also, “return of goods” has set a limit of scope for exercising this right.

Besides, the word “revocation” has its unique advantage.

The following part will give a discussion of the conditions and termsfor using this right, including the positive and negative scope. It will beginfrom two aspects. One is from the method of trading, e.g. face-to-facepurchase or distance sale, and the other is type of goods, depending onwhether it is virtual, intellectual or Internet downloadable. All thesedifferent conditions may lead to different effects for exercising this right.

Part three will focus on the problems and disputes currently shown inChina's practise. The main divergence is whehter online auction andconsignment-purchase should be given the right of revocation under Article25. As consignment-purchase is a new form of online sales and there'realso many types of consignment-purchase, which could lead to differentresults. The online auction is also very popular in China, even some courtsmake cooperations with Taobao to make judical auction through Internet.

And then it turns to the cheat problem happened not in China, but also inmany developed countries. So it has become a serious question to handlethe misuse of right. A proposal of building “Net Credit System” is raised inorder to find a solution.

The last part is the conclusion, it will summarize the thesis in clearand brief words.

KEY WORDS:Right of Revocation by Consumers, Law of thePeople's Republic of China on the Protection of Consumer Rights andInterests, Consumer Protection Law of Taiwan, German Civil Code

引言 …… 1

一、選題背景和研究意義 …… 1

二、本文的創新之處 …… 3

三、本文使用的研究方法 …… 3

第一章消費者反悔權的概念界定 …… 5

一、消費者反悔權的法律屬性之辨 …… 5

（一）《德國民法典》中的消費者撤回權 …… 5

（二）臺灣“消費者保護法”中的解除權 …… 8

（三）我國《消費者權益保護法》中的無因退貨權 …… 10

二、本文使用“反悔權”的意義與作用 …… 11

第二章消費者反悔權的適用范圍與例外情形 …… 14

一、消費者反悔權的適用范圍 …… 14