论体制转型期执行和解的法律效力

On the Legal Effect of the Execution Settlement During the Social Transformation Period

《民事诉讼法》第230条第2款是执行和解效力争议的源头,该规定体现了职权主义执行体制和"法院干预型"执行和解的正当性逻辑,与"当事人自主型"执行和解存在某种紧张关系.当前学界和实务界在维护和解协议的拘束力与原生效法律文书的执行力之间陷入两难,关键在于没有从执行体制层面看待执行和解及其法律效力,没有对"法院干预型"执行和解与"当事人自主型"执行和解进行区分.同时,又将恢复对原生效法律文书的执行这一诉讼法上的法律救济与和解协议的实体效力过度绑定.要合理界定执行和解的法律效力,需要从执行体制转型的视角对"法院干预型"执行和解和"当事人自主型"执行和解进行区分,并需要在区分实体和程序的基础上,对两者的实体法律效力作差异化处理.执行和解究竟对原生效法律文书的执行力产生何种影响,应通过诉讼程序依实体法规定和原理具体判断.

The disputes on the legal effect of the execution settlement result from the special provision of the second paragraph of Article 230 of the Civil Procedural Law,which is in accordance with the court-oriented execution settlement,but in conflict with the party-controlled execution settlement.But because there is no perspective of the execution system transformation,no differentiation between the court-oriented execution settlement and the party-controlled execution settlement,and no distinction between substantive and procedural problems,the current discussion on the legal effect of the execution settlement falls into a dilemma that it should be emphasized on the binding force of the execution settlement as a contract or the enforceability of the original execution title.Therefore,this article argues that the legal effect of the execution settlement should be distinguished based on the difference between the court-oriented execution settlement and the party-controlled execution settlement,and its effect on the enforceability of the original execution title should he determined on the substantial law.Accordingly,the second paragraph of Article 230 of the Civil Procedural Law should be interpreted as a pure civil procedural rule.