支付令既判力之研判

Study on the Res Judicata of the Order of Payment

作为执行根据的支付令在执行力之外是否亦有既判力,理论上存在肯定和否定两种观点,肯定论以"认诺"为理论根据,认为债务人放弃异议的行为即为对债权人诉讼请求的承认,从而法院不必进入实体审理即可裁判债权人的诉讼请求成立,该实体裁判当然具有既判力。否定论则因督促程序省略了实质审理不能像判决程序一样给予当事人充分的程序保障而否定支付令的既判力。单纯的肯定或者否定都是对效率和公平非此即彼地追求,限制论则较好地平衡了二者的关系,在承认支付令既判力的同时亦对督促程序的适用、发生既判力的程序要件以及既判力的范围等作出适当限制。

There are two contradict viewpoints in theory about if the order of payment as an enforcement basis has res judicata besides the enforcement effect. The affirmative theory based on the theory of admission of litigant regard the behavior of debtor waiving to object as the admission of claims of creditor, as a result the court may enter the judgment for creditor without trial. The negative theory based on the principle of procedural safeguards deny res judicata of the order of payment because the payment order procedure omits the substantive trial proceeding which damages the interest of debtor. Absolute affirmation or denial to res judicata of the order of payment always pursue the efficiency or justice alternatively, but the limitation theory can balance these two dimensions which affirm res judicata of the order of payment on the one hand and limit the application of payment order procedure, the procedural requirements to generate res judicata and the scope of res judicata.