消费者后悔权的行使与发展研究

    本篇论文目录导航：

    【题目】消费者后悔权的行使与发展研究
    【引言】消费者后悔权面临的问题探究引言
    【第一章】消费者反悔权的概念界定
    【2.1】消费者反悔权的适用范围
    【2.2】消费者后悔权的适用例外
    【3.1  3.2】新消法适用及消费者退货欺诈及其预防
    【3.3】拓宽和改进消费者救济渠道
    【结论/参考文献】消费者后悔权使用困境探析结论与参考文献

　　摘 要

　　消费者“反悔权”（又称“后悔权”）是在市场经济发展到一定条件下产生的一种新型民事权利，对保护消费者合法权益具有十分重大的意义。这项权利被很多学者认为是突破了传统民法中“有约必守原则”（pacta sunt servanda），所以无论是在欧盟消费者保护指令向内国法转化、德国“债法改革”中将其编入民法典，还是在我国《消费者权益保护法》的首次修订中，都引起了广大的争鸣。我国台湾地区“消费者保护法”也规定有消费者反悔权，并在司法实践中暴露了一些问题，业已进入“立法院”的修改程序。

　　从历史的角度来看，我国的消费者保护水平相较西方发达国家一直相差较远。经修订的《中华人民共和国消费者权益保护法》于 2014年 3 月 15 日正式生效施行，使得从法律规定的文字本身，到随之而来的经营者修改服务条款现象，都为这项权利的研究提供了新的素材。

　　本文将对这项权利的基本理论进行探讨，通过比较国内外这项制度的具体规定、国内外经营者的应对措施，进一步分析该权利的行使条件与发展方向，以及这项权利目前面临的问题，并在论述中穿插对我国《消保法》中相关条款的评议。

　　文章的第一部分将对这项权利进行界定。由于学界针对这样一项“消费者退回购买商品，经营者返还其价金”的特殊权利，使用了不同的称呼，这便意味着在对这项权利的认识上存在不同。德国法学者认为该权利是撤回意思表示的权利，从其民法典的规定，使用了消费者“撤回权”这一概念。我国台湾地区立法者在其“消费者保护法”中将之描述为“解除契约”,认为是合同解除权。我国《消费者权益保护法》中使用的是“退货”二字，因此也有人认为是无因退货权。笔者赞同一些学者所使用的“反悔权”,因为前几种命名不符合我国《合同法》对撤回、撤销、解除的定义，而“无因退货权”又有缩小权利行使对象的嫌疑。此外，反悔权这一表述本身也有其独到的优点。

　　随后文章将在第二部分分析这项权利的使用条件，包括该权利的适用范围与例外。此部分主要从两个方面展开，一是根据交易方式，如经营者与消费者是借助了远程科技手段，还是面对面在何种场所订立合同，均会对这项权利的产生与行使产生不同影响；另一方面是根据商品类型的不同，比如承载了知识产权的实体商品、经互联网直接下载的虚拟商品等，探讨它们是否能够适用反悔权。

　　第三部分即是现阶段我国规定的消费者反悔权所遇到的问题，主要有新《消保法》第 25 条第 2 款规定下带来的代购与拍卖排除反悔权是否合理。盖网上代购作为一种新兴的购物形式，对于代购行为、代购物品的不同判定会让反悔权的行使发生变化。网上拍卖在中国也逐渐参与者众，多地法院甚至与“淘宝网”展开合作，进行网上司法拍卖，其中也会带来反悔权的适用问题。此部分还论及了退货欺诈及预防问题。因为不仅仅在中国，即使在公民素质较高、建有完备诚信体系的发达国家，也存在各种各样的退货欺诈。如何避免权利滥用也因此构成了反悔权中的重要议题。最后笔者提出了构建“网络经营者诚信信息系统”以改进消费者救济渠道的设想。

　　文章最后一部分是本文的结论，对全文观点做出提炼，进行总括，得出结论。

　　关键词：消费者反悔权，消费者权益保护法，台湾消费者保护法，德国民法典

　　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

    目录

　　引言 …… 1

　　一、选题背景和研究意义 …… 1

　　二、本文的创新之处 …… 3

　　三、本文使用的研究方法 …… 3

　　第一章消费者反悔权的概念界定 …… 5

　　一、消费者反悔权的法律属性之辨 …… 5

　　（一）《德国民法典》中的消费者撤回权 …… 5

　　（二）台湾“消费者保护法”中的解除权 …… 8

　　（三）我国《消费者权益保护法》中的无因退货权 …… 10

　　二、本文使用“反悔权”的意义与作用 …… 11

　　第二章消费者反悔权的适用范围与例外情形 …… 14

　　一、消费者反悔权的适用范围 …… 14

　　（一）“上门交易” …… 15

　　（二）“异地交易” …… 16

　　（三）扩大适用范围之设想 …… 16

　　二、消费者反悔权的适用例外 …… 19

　　（一）各地立法概述与比较 …… 19

　　（二）减少例外情形之设想 …… 22

　　第三章消费者反悔权行使中的特殊问题 …… 24

　　一、新《消保法》第 25 条第 2 款如何适用 …… 26

　　（一）“代购”商品的分情形适用 …… 27

　　（二）互联网拍卖不应适用反悔权 …… 28

　　二、消费者退货欺诈及其预防措施 …… 29

　　三、拓宽和改进消费者救济渠道 …… 31

　　结论 …… 35

　　参考文献 …… 37