論無因管理之構成要件-以我國實務判決為中心

Abstract

無因管理明文規範於我國民法第172-178條，共計七個條文。就請求權的適用關係上，應屬契約之債排除後，進入法定之債應優先檢視者。惟實務運作上，往往因相同事實同時有其他請求權併同主張，使得無因管理未能有明確具體之適用類型。本文擬以學說整理出無因管理之適用架構，復以實務判決之觀察對比學說所建構之無因管理體系，期望能透過探討真正無因管理成立之要件，建構出明確之無因管理適用要件。比較法上，除有我國無因管理章節制訂時所參酌之泰國民商法相互比較，並有泰國最高法院之實務案例介紹。本文在我國實務判決研究分析中，並發現實務對於無因管理之成立要件，亦有將管理人的通知同列為無因管理之成立要件，而採以顯然不同於學說或循法條文義之成立要件認定。對此，就比較法之立場，本文擬以歐洲民事法模範草案（Draft Common France of Reference）之管理人應具備之合理立場判斷（Reasonable ground），作為比較分析對象，蓋歐洲民事草案就無因管理之規範雖採與我國略不相同之法條體系，而在成立要件上限縮無因管理之客體範圍僅有適法之無因管理。惟採此限縮立場之模範草案，並將管理人之通知義務明文規範於適法性要件中。本文擬以實務判決研究並輔以比較法之觀點，進一步討論管理人有無對本人為管理行為之通知之必要，又或者系爭通知是否可作為無因管理成立與否之判準。透過比較法的介紹與分析比較，期待能提供一更明確的無因管理成立要件判準。

Management of affairs without mandate are set among Article 172 to 178 of Taiwanese Civil Code. It should be excluded after contract discussion and right on the top of non-contractual obligations in Civil Code. But in Taiwanese civil courts, cases are usually accompanied with other non-contractual obligations which could be also applied, so the true management of affairs without Mandate is really hard to establish in a clear definition. As a result, my thesis is in attempt to compare the Articles with all the theories and judgment in Taiwan, and try to define a clear constituent external element to establish the system. For a historical prospective, I compared Thailand Civil Law with Taiwanese Civil Code because Taiwan took it as a reference while establishing Taiwanese Civil Code. In collection of the cases in Taiwan, I have also noticed that the notification to the principal also takes as an important element to establish the true management of affairs without mandate. But in Taiwanese Civil Code, the notification duty for the manager only serve as a duty, after the true management of affairs without mandate has been established. Based on the field of comparative law, The Draft Common France of Reference (DCFR) specialize in the duty to inform the principal in BookV-1:101(1) a. Despite the fact that DCFR uses a system which is different from Taiwan, including not only true benevolent intervention but DCFR also stands on the reasonable ground. DCFR may establish a much clear index in defining whether or not the management of affairs without mandate should sustain. As a result, my thesis has the emphasis to combine DCFR with Taiwanese court judgment and attempts to clarify the true elements in establishing the whole system.