论社团主体的法律属性

发布时间：2018-04-13 08:23

本文选题：社团 + 主体　；参考：《中国政法大学》2006年博士论文

【摘要】： 本文所做的工作,是对德国民法的理性——主体——意志图式的形成基础及其对团体主体法律属性的决定性影响进行分析。由于我国自清末变法即不无偶然地选择了德国民法为范本,时至今日,许多理念的影响仍根深蒂固,基本概念体系仍延续其使用,关于团体主体地位理论和实践上的许多问题也与德国民法上的问题存在共性。因此,本文的考察和论证对于我国民法主体基本理论的清晰化有一定的现实意义。全文共分为六个主要部分。第一部分的主要内容是厘清民事主体资格的意义、标志与结构特征,以此作为后文分析的铺垫。本文认为,从资格角度来说,民法上的主体意味着民事权利义务的归属,而在这种归属资格的背后,近代以降的民事主体还表现出对理性因素的特别强调,这也是民事主体与仅表述适用商法来规范其行为者的“商事主体”的根本差别。在这一部分,本文还指出,《德国民法典》为满足形式结构的需要,解决自然人和法人在同一民事主体制度的框架下共存的问题,扬弃了传统的“人格”概念,而以无伦理性的“权利能力”作为民事主体资格在实证法上的标志。民事主体结构的实证性、开放性和非统一性也因团体主体的确认得以彰显。第二部分的主要内容是关于团体主体资格的历史探寻与价值分析。历史告诉我们,法人的典型形式——现代公司出现于17世纪初期,而完备的法人制度确立于《德国民法典》,此前的实定法受自然法思想的影响一直坚持一元主体。通过价值考察我们发现,《德国民法典》确立法人制度,很大程度上就是出于一种经济功利主义的考虑,是为了表彰资本的合理性。法人的历史和价值为我们深刻理解法人主体性与自然人主体性的差异提供了鲜明的线索,也为后文分析团体主体的法律属性提供了背景资料。在第三部分,本文分析了历史和现实中关于团体主体资格的问题与争议,对其中团体主体地位的实在性之争提出了自己的看法。本文认为,所谓法人主体地位的拟制理论,并不是在实证法层面上来讲的。拟制理论真正想说明的问题,其实是法人这种法律上的人在哲学说明意义上不能和个人等量齐观,不具有根本性价值,反映到私法上,即法人的权利能力并非理所当然。当法律通过复杂的人格化技术处理了法人与其成员之间的关系,使得法人已经在相当大的程度上不再依
[Abstract]:The work done in this paper is to analyze the formation basis of the rational subject-will schema of German civil law and its decisive influence on the legal attribute of the group subject.Since China chose the German civil law as a model by chance since the late Qing Dynasty, the influence of many ideas is still deep-rooted, and the basic concept system continues to be used.Many problems in the theory and practice of group subject status are also common to those in German civil law.Therefore, the investigation and argumentation of this paper has certain practical significance for the clarity of the basic theory of the subject of civil law in our country.The full text is divided into six main parts.The main content of the first part is to clarify the meaning, symbol and structural characteristics of civil subject qualification, which is used as the paver of the later analysis.This paper holds that, from the point of view of qualification, the subject in civil law means the attribution of civil rights and obligations, and behind this qualification, the civil subject in modern times also shows a special emphasis on rational factors.This is also the fundamental difference between the civil subject and the commercial subject which only expresses the applicable commercial law to regulate its actors.In this part, the article also points out that in order to meet the needs of formal structure, the German Civil Code solves the problem that natural and legal persons coexist in the framework of the same civil subject system, sublimating the traditional concept of "personality".The non-ethical "right capacity" is regarded as the mark of the civil subject qualification in the positive law.The positivism, openness and non-unity of the civil subject structure are also demonstrated by the confirmation of the group subject.The second part is about the historical exploration and value analysis of group subject qualification.History tells us that the typical form of legal person-modern company appeared in the early 17th century, and the complete legal person system was established in the German Civil Code.Through the value investigation, we find that the establishment of the legal person system in the German Civil Code, to a great extent, is based on the consideration of economic utilitarianism and is in order to recognize the rationality of capital.The history and value of the legal person provide us with a clear clue to understand the difference between the subjectivity of the legal person and the subjectivity of the natural person, and also provide the background information for the later analysis of the legal attributes of the subject of the group.In the third part, this paper analyzes the problems and disputes about the qualification of group subject in history and reality, and puts forward its own opinion on the dispute of the status of group subject.This paper holds that the fictitious theory of the status of legal person is not from the perspective of positive law.The problem that the fictitious theory really wants to explain is that the legal person, in the sense of philosophical explanation, is not equal to the individual and has no fundamental value, which is reflected in private law, that is, the legal person's right capacity is not taken for granted.When the law deals with the relationship between a legal person and its members through complex personalization techniques, the legal person has, to a considerable extent, ceased to follow.
【学位授予单位】：中国政法大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2006
【分类号】：D913

【参考文献】