“欺诈”的要件重构与立法课题——以民法典的编纂为背景

Reconstruction of the essential requirements and the legislative issues of fraud:the codification of the Chinese Civil Code

关于欺诈的要件构成,在肯定"违法性"的要件意义的同时,应肯定"过失的欺诈"的可能;这样的观点能够得到我国裁判实务与比较法的支持。考虑到"错误一元论",欺诈应被视为处于错误制度的延长线上,从而改变"意思的欠缺"与"意思表示不自由"的传统区分。新兴的信息提供义务可以作为判断欺罔行为以及该行为是否具有违法性的要素,未必作为平行于欺诈或错误的另一种意思表示瑕疵制度进行规定。欺诈的"双效果"立法模式也不应延续,应仅规定欺诈导致"行为效力消灭",损害赔偿由侵权责任加以解决;此时可以将欺诈制度看作侵权责任法的"特别法"。无论是当下的民法总则还是未来的民法典编纂,都应充分意识到有关欺诈的理论及实务动向在立法论层面的意味。

While illegality is regarded as one of the essential requirements of fraud,another possibility should be considered:if one of the parties of contract'negligently'conceals or falsifies factual information,the counterpart should be given the right of claim based on the former's'fraud'. This argument conforms to the judicial practice in China and the comparative law. Taking the monist mode of mistake into consideration,fraud and mistake should be regarded as coessential institutions. The duty to inform could be one of the factors to estimate the existence of fraud and the illegality of fraud. Traditionally,there are'dual effects'of fraud:one is extermination of the judicial acts,and the other is damages to the party who was cheated. The ideal mode of the effect of fraud should only refer to the former. And the damages should be dealt with in torts. In this case,the rules about fraud could be regarded as the special law of tort law. In this sense,the drafters of both the General Rules of Civil Code and the Chinese Civil Code need to be fully aware of the tendency of the theory and judicial practice about fraud.