涉不动产离婚协议的效力重塑及其解释论展开

• 영문명: The Effectiveness of the Real Estate-related Divorce Agreement and Its Interpretation of the Expansion of the Theory
• 발행기관: YIXIN 출판사
• 저자명: Liu Xin
• 간행물 정보: 『Journal of east Asian law studies』Vol.2 No.2, 88~99쪽, 전체 12쪽
• 주제분류: 사회과학 > 교육학
• 파일형태: PDF
• 발행일자: 2025.06.30

국문 초록

The validity of the agreement on the distribution of property between husband and wife has long been faced with the double dilemma of judicial practice and theoretical research, especially the divorce agreement involving real estate is the most typical. The core controversy focuses on the theoretical difference between the validity of property rights and the validity of claims. The fundamental reason for the theoretical divide is the theoretical interpretation and judicial practice of the preference for differences. Supporters of the in rem theory, based on the special nature of the matrimonial property contract, the ethical nature of the marital relationship, and the legal nature of the division of the common property, advocate that the divorce agreement can directly lead to the change of property rights, while the judicial practice generally adopts the creditor’s theory of validity, emphasizing that it is fundamentally contradictory to the creditor’s formalistic model of property rights established by the Civil Code. The essence of the doctrine of the validity of property confuses the distinction between the act of burden and the act of disposal, breaking through the legislative bottom line of the “registration of the effective doctrine”, the judicial practice of “the same case, different judgments” phenomenon reveals the inherent tensions between the doctrine and the principle of protection of the security of the transaction, the divorce agreement is equivalent to the husband and wife. Property system contract there are normative basis and system function of the double dislocation. The divorce agreement involving real estate does not have a legitimate basis for directly causing changes in property rights, the trial should strictly follow the Civil Code to establish the validity of the position of the claim.

영문 초록

夫妻离婚财产分配协议的效力认定长期面临司法实务与理论研究的双重困境，尤以涉不动产离婚协议最为典型。核心争议聚焦于物权效力说与债权效力说的理论分野。理论分野产生的根本原因是理论解释与司法实践的偏好存在差异。支持物权效力说者立足于夫妻财产制契约的特殊性、婚姻关系的伦理性以及共有物分割的法定性，主张离婚协议可直接引致物权变动；而司法实践则普遍采债权效力说，强调其与《民法典》确立的债权形式主义物权变动模式存在根本性冲突。物权效力说实质混淆负担行为与处分行为的区分，突破“登记生效主义”的立法底线，司法实践中“同案异判”现象暴露出该说与交易安全保护原则的内在紧张，将离婚协议等同于夫妻财产制契约存在规范依据与制度功能的双重错位。涉不动产离婚协议并不具备直接引致物权变动的正当性基础，审判时应当严格遵循《民法典》确立的债权效力定位。

목차

Ⅰ. 引言

Ⅱ. 涉不动产离婚协议物权效力的司法实证

Ⅲ. 涉不动产离婚协议效力的理论分野

Ⅳ. 物权效力说的理论解构与规范缺陷

Ⅴ. 涉不动产离婚协议债权效力的规范证成

Ⅵ. 结语

参考文献

키워드

Divorce property distribution agreement Real estate agreement In rem effect claim effect 离婚财产分配协议 不动产约定 物权效力 债权效力