保理中虚假基础交易风险的法律规制——基于《民法典》第763条之思辨

Legal Regulation on the Risk of False Basic Transaction in Factoring--On the Basis of Article 763 of the Civil Code

债权人与债务人虚构应收账款骗取保理融资款项,系保理纠纷频发的主要原因之一。《民法典》第763条对虚构应收账款的债务人以应收账款不存在为由的抗辩进行了限制,以不得抗辩为原则,辅以“保理人明知”的例外,并将例外的证明责任明确分配至提出抗辩的债务人一方,用更低的社会成本防范信用风险的发生,系符合成本效益理论之举措。但是,该条但书不当扩张了善意第三人信赖利益的保护范围,在同一法典语境下,权利外观责任的认定标准不宜多样化。在适用《民法典》第763条时,宜对“保理人明知”的这一例外规定进行漏洞填补,依法理和主流裁判观点将其解释为“保理人明知或应当知道虚构的除外”。

The main reason for the frequent occurrence of factoring disputes is that creditors and debtors make up accounts receivable to defraud for factoring.Article 763 of the Civil Code limits the debtor who fabricated accounts receivable to defense on the ground of that the accounts receivable do not exist.The rule is based on the principle of no defense,and supplemented by the exception of“the factor knows”,while assigning the burden of proof to the debtor who raises the defense.It is successful to prevent the occurrence of credit risk with lower social cost.Therefore,it is a measure in line with cost-benefit theory.However,the proviso improperly expands the scope of protection for the reliance interest of bona fide third parties.In the context of the same code,the standard of power appearance responsibility should not be multiple.In terms of legal interpretation,it is advisable to fill in the loopholes in the exception of“the factor knows”,which should be interpreted as“the factor knows or should know”in accordance with the legal principle and the mainstream view of referee,so as to effectively resolve the conflict of system interpretation.