《民法总则》重大误解视野下动机错误的救济路径分析——以错误“二元论”与“一元论”之争为切入点

On Remedy Path of Mistakes of Motivation within the Scope Significant Misunderstandings of General Principles of Chinese Civil Law——In the Light of the Controversy of Monist and Dualist Definition of Mistakes

对于动机错误有二元论与一元论之争。二元论者囿于"错误"是"表意人非故意的意思与表示不一致"的理念,不得不将"性质错误"拟制为内容错误,将双方动机错误置于错误法外救济。此种处理模式导致错误理论日益复杂化,难以把握。一元论为了将动机错误从可救济的错误中排除出去,主要采用列举或者相对人可识别性的方式。列举方式的优点是通俗易懂、便于操作,缺点是难免存在遗漏;相对人可识别性的方式无法妥善解决纯使他人受益的法律行为中的动机错误与双方动机错误问题。我国可以借鉴一元论和二元论的优点,尝试采用第三条路径,即"统分结合模式":"分"就是坚持动机错误与表示错误的区分;"统"就是在司法解释中,将主观行为基础错误、性质错误以及纯使他人受益的法律行为中,成为行为人发出意思表示唯一原因或主要原因的动机错误和表示错误一体纳入《民法总则》148条予以救济。

Confined by the conception that mistakes refer to the unintentional inconsistency between expression and intention of the representor, the dualists have to assume mistakes of nature to be mistakes of content and exclude bidirectional mistakes of in- tention. Thus more and more complex mistake theories have to be developed, which are becoming difficult to handle. To rule out mistakes of intention from remediable mistakes, the monists mainly resort to ways of enumeration or counterpart identifiability. The enumeration way is approachable and feasible but fail to shun possible exceptions. The way of counterpart identifiability can not solve bidirectional mistakes of intention and purely altruistic mistakes of intention. By taking in the advantages of both monists and dualists, We can set up a third path, combination of centralization and decentralization ： decentralization means to sensibly distinguish mistakes of intention from mistakes of expression; centralization is, in the judicial interpretation, to remedy mistakes of expression, mistakes of subjective behavior basis, mistakes of nature and some mistakes of intention which have been made out of or mainly out of altruistic concerns, which should be covered by the Article 148 of the general principles of civil law.