中国《民法典》居住权制度的检讨与完善
The Review and Perfection of the System of Right of HabitAtion in the Civil Code of China
李海燕(중국연변대학교); 蒋兆琳(중국연변대학교); 李庭欣(중국연변대학교)
46권, 93~121쪽
초록
居住权最早可追溯至罗马法时期,其最初是为了特定家庭成员和奴隶 的生活居住保障而设立,后随着社会的发展,这一制度陆续被各欧洲国 家予以继承,并针对各国的传统文化和社会差异进行了本土化调整. 中国在2002年的《物权法征求意见稿》中曾提议将居住权确立为物权制度, 但后来基于适用面窄以及其他等原因最终被摒弃. 直至2018年,为将党在 十九大报告中提出的要构建多主体供给、多渠道保障住房制度的要求具体贯彻落实,居住权重新被纳入讨论范围,作为一种新型用益物权在 2021年出台的《民法典》中得以专章确立,并对居住权的得丧变更以及 其合同所应包含的一般条款内容予以了阐释. 居住权的设立具有划时代的意义,但同时其作为一项全新的制度,其各方面尚有不完善之处,需要 进一步检讨和完善. 例如在现有规范中,主客体的范围限定不明确,规定 的居住权消灭事由过于单一,遗嘱设立居住权参照合同约定设立并不宜 适用等等;同时也遗漏了法定居住权和投资性居住权以及居住权人与所 有权人之间的权利义务关系规范.故本文从现实问题出发,基于历史研究的方法,从历史的角度溯源居 住权在中国的演变发展,探究不同时期下居住权变化的原因;同时对居 住的制度价值进行效用分析,探讨居住权对于完善中国住房保障制度以及“以房养老”等方面的独特价值;最后通过比较研究,搜集域外国家关于 居住权制度的规定,分析比较各国居住权制度的异同,探究该制度在中 国更好的适用路径,最后得出结论认为有必要在了解中国居住权制度的发展历程以及功能展望的前提下,结合社会实践需要,检讨解释现有规 范,补阙遗漏规范. 一方面,对于现有规范的检讨和解释聚焦于将居住权 的主体范围扩大至包括法人和非法人组织在内的所有民事主体,允许在部分住房及附属设施上设立居住权,明确遗嘱设立的生效适用,丰富居住权的消灭事由;另一方面,在遗漏规范的补阙上则主要体现在以后的立法或司法解释中,应突破传统居住权不可转让、继承的束缚,新增投 资性居住权,强化其物权属性;与此同时还应当在充分尊重权利人自由意志的情况下,对各方具体的权利义务内容予以明确,以便更好的适用居住权,保障权利人的合法权益,充分发挥居住权的效用.
Abstract
The right of habitation can be traced back to the Roman law period. It was originally established to guarantee the living and housing of specific family members and slaves. With the development of society, this system was successively inherited by European countries and other countries and targeted the traditional culture and social differences of various countries have undergone localization adjustments. In the 2002 “Property Law Draft for Solicitation of Comments”, China once proposed to establish the right of habitation as a real right system, but later it was not stipulated in the “Property Law” due to the narrow scope of application and other reasons. Until 2018, in order to implement the requirements of the party’s 19th National Congress report to build a multi-subject supply and multi-channel guarantee housing system, the right of habitation was re-introduced into the scope of discussion, As a new usufructuary right, it was established in a special chapter in the Civil Code issued in 2021, and explains the change of the right of habitation and the general clauses that should be included in the contract. The establishment of the right of habitation has epoch-making significance, but at the same time, as a new system, its various aspects are still imperfect, and need to be further reviewed and improved.For example, in the existing norms, the scope of the subject is not clear, the reasons for the elimination of the right of habitation are too single, and the establishment of the right of habitation in a will is not suitable for the establishment of the residence in accordance with the contract. At the same time, the legal right of habitation and the right of investment habitation are also omitted, As well as the norms of the rights and obligations between the holder of the right of habitation and the owner. In view of this, this paper start from practical problems and based on historical research methods, traces the origin of the evolution and development of the right of habitation in China from a historical perspective, and explores the reasons for the change of the right of residence in different periods. At the same time, the utility analysis of the institutional value of residence is carried out, and the unique value of the right of residence in improving the housing security system and“house-for-pension” in China is discussed. Finally, through comparative study, the provisions of the right of residence system of foreign countries are collected, the similarities and differences of the right of residence system of different countries are analyzed and compared, in order to find the better application path of the system in China. Finally, it concludes that it is necessary to understand the development process and clear the function to be played of China's habitation right system, Review and explain the existing norms and make up for omissions. Expand the scope of the subject of the right of habitation to all civil subjects including legal persons and unincorporated organizations, allow the establishment of the right of habitation on a part of house and affiliated facilities, clarify the effective application of the establishment of the will, and enrich the causes of the elimination of the right of habitation. At the same time, in the future legislation or judicial interpretation, we should break the restrictions of non-transferability and inheritance of the traditional right of habitation, add the investment residence right and strengthen its property right attribute. In addition, under the condition of fully respecting the free will of the obliged, the specific rights and obligations of each party should be clarified, so as to better apply the right of habitation, protect the legitimate rights, and give full play to the effectiveness of the right of habitation.
- 발행기관:
- 한중법학회
- 분류:
- 비교법학