強制執行之財產開示制度

Property Discovery System in Compulsory Enforcement

10.6199/NTULJ.2007.36.02.03

許士宦(Shu-Huan Shyuu)

有效權利實現 ； 財產開示請求權 ； 個人資訊自己決定權 ； 債務不履行者名簿 ； 執行準備程序 ； 財產報告制度 ； effective right enforcement ； claims of property discovery ； individual information self-determination rights

臺大法學論叢

36卷2期（2007 / 06 / 30）

93 - 130

繁體中文

在強制執行上，爲謀求債權人之權利適切保護，首要之途是確保債權人知悉債務人責任財產之內容及所在，俾利其特定可供執行財產而聲請強制執行，藉以回收債權，實現權利。爲此，應發揮財產報告制度之財產開示機能，使其成爲權利有效實現之重要手段。在解釋及運用上，只要執行無效或預期難能執行，執行法院即應依債權人聲請命債務人報告現有積極財產及因得撤銷行爲之財產變動狀況，使債權人及時取得必要之財產資訊，而保障其財產開示請求權。再者，爲了健全財產開示制度，輔助執行名義之執行，在立法上宜明確將財產報告制度定位爲執行準備程序，使財產報告程序於聲請開始執行前即得實施，並將其程序構造二階段化，賦予當事人應有之程序保障，且強化財產開示義務之間接制裁及執行財產資訊之保護措施，滿足平衡兼顧財產開示及隱私保護等基本要求。

The reform of the judicial system should not only cover the trial system, but also the compulsory enforcement system. If the obligor is unable to effectively enforce his rights in accordance with the title of enforcement granted from the trial procedure, such frustration may result in the obligor's distrust to, or apartness from, the judicial system. In the matter of compulsory enforcement, for the purpose of properly protect the obligor's rights, the initial measurement is to secure the obligor's awareness of the ist, as well as the location, of obligee's subject matter properties. It enables the obligor to specify the property scope subject to the compulsory enforcement, which makes the debts in subject collectable and enforceable. Accordingly, the current Compulsory Enforcement Law provides the obligee property reporting system. This property reporting system grants access to the obligee's property information and the obligor may therefore acknowledge the subject matter properties or deliverables. Nevertheless, it is criticized that such system is ineffective but symbolic. In addition, in the practice of compulsory enforcement, more than forty (40) percent of cases are concluded by issuing the debt certificate, rather than by fully compensating the obligor. It becomes crucial to study the following topics, including (1) What are the procedure and context of the aforementioned property reporting system; (2) From the comparative law prospective, how does the local law differentiate from the foreign property discovery systems; (3) Does the local procedure or system carry out its functions and effectiveness; and (4) If it does not, how should we improve it? This study refers to the evolution of property discovery system in Germany, Korea and Japan, comments on the strength and shortfalls of Taiwan property reporting system, and intends to solve the issues from the methodology of law interpretation, law application and legislation amendment. This study is necessary and beneficial to enhance Taiwan property discovery system, to prevent the obligee from hiding his properties, and eventually secure the obligor the effectiveness of compulsory enforcement.

1. 山本和彥(1991)。民事手続法学の革新（下）。
2. 山本和彥(2002)。強制執行手続における債權者の保護と債務者の保護，権利実現過程の基本構造。
3. 中野貞一郎(2006)。民事執行法。
4. 內山衛次(1998)。強制執行における債務者の財產開示（一）、（二）。大阪学院大学法学研究，25(1)
5. 內山衛次(1999)。強制執行における債務者の財產開示（一）、（二）。大阪学院大学法学研究，25(2)
6. 司法院編(1989)。司法院強制執行法研究修正資料彙編（一）。
7. 石川明(1998)。ドイツ強制執行法の改正。
8. 石川明(1977)。ドイツ強制執行法研究。
9. 谷口園惠、筒井健夫(2004)。改正担保·執行法の解說。
10. 花村良一(2001)。米國民事事件における裁判所侮辱の実情(4)。NBL，714
11. 金庠均(2002)。強制執行の財產明示制度－韓國における成果を中心。民商法雑誌，127(1)
12. 金庠均(2002)。韓、日民事執行法上の主要制度の論点と比較，権利実現過程の基本構造。
13. 浦野雄幸編(2005)。基本法コンメンタール。
14. 許士宦(2005)。定暫時狀態處分之基本構造，證據蒐集與紛爭解決。學林。
15. 陳榮宗(1999)。強制執行法。
16. 黃國昌(2005)。自由、責任、法。
17. 楊與齡(2005)。強制執行法論。
18. 道垣内弘人、山本和彥、古賀政治、小林明彥(2004)。新しい担保·執行制度。
19. 鈴木尚久(2001)。ドイツにおける財産開示制度。判例タイムズ，1057

1. 許士宦(2008)。金錢及物交付執行之間接強制。臺大法學論叢，37(2)，151-188。
2. 許士宦(2009)。執行力客觀範圍擴張之法律構造：兼論其與既判力客觀範圍之異同。臺大法學論叢，38(1)，61-110。
3. 許士宦(2012)。2011年民事程序法發展回顧：民事程序法之新進展。臺大法學論叢，41(S)，1501-1535。