侵害債權人人格權之債務不履行與非財產上損害賠償

Abstract

人格權乃人格實現所不可或缺之權利，更是人作為法律主體得以享有一切財產權之基礎，自為民法所應保護之核心價值。我國民法中關於人格權受侵害時之非財產上損害賠償依據，原僅規定在侵權行為之領域，直至民國88年債編修正時，始於債務不履行制度中增訂第227條之1。第227條之1施行迄今已16年餘，此一條文是否已適切地發揮其制度功能？又對我國之人格權保護帶來何種有別於侵權行為規定之實益？均值得吾人觀察與探究。 本文首先透過判決之統計與分析，觀察第227條之1於實務上有無優於侵權行為規定之實益，再從第227條之1準用侵權行為規定之立法方式，檢討可能造成之適用疑義，並就第227條之1準用第197條短期時效之不當，提出在人格權為契約履行利益之情形，應透過目的性限縮之手段排除第197條適用之建議。本文進一步指出，人格權或其他人格法益得做為契約之履行利益，故第227條之1除了不完全給付以外，亦應一併適用於給付遲延與給付不能之類型，如此將賦予第227條之1獨立於侵權行為而專屬債務不履行制度之適用實益。最後，本文試圖透過契約自由原則之概念，使人格權或其他人格法益得以在多元而彈性之契約類型中獲得更完整之保障，並給予第227條之1高於侵權行為規定之積極意義。

Personality rights are not only the inherent rights for personality achievement but also the foundation that people, as the legal entity, can enjoy all property rights, so that they are the core value to be protected by the Civil Code. In Taiwan Civil Code, the legal basis of non-pecuniary damages in infringement of personality rights was previously provided only in torts; until 1999, when the Part of Obligations of the Civil Code was amended, Article 227-1 was first added. 16 years have passed since Article 227-1 was applied. Whether Article 227-1 has fittingly exerted its system functions and what benefits apart from tort provisions it has brought for the protection of personality rights in Taiwan are the issues worthy of observation and exploration. First of all, in this article, whether there is the real benefit of Article 227-1 better than tort provisions in practice is observed through the statistics and analysis of judgments. Then, it is reviewed whether the legislation way of the mutatis mutandis of tort provisions in Article 227-1 may cause applicable doubts. Besides, for the inappropriateness of the mutatis mutandis of Article 197 short-term limitation period in Article 227-1, it is suggested that in the case personality rights are for contract performance interest, the application of Article 197 should be excluded through teleological reduction. Further, it is noted in this article that personality rights or other legal interests of personality can be the performance interest of contracts; therefore, in addition to incomplete performance, Article 227-1 should be also applicable to impossible performance and deferred performance so that Article 227-1 will be given with the applicable benefit being exclusive of non-performance and independent of torts. At last, in this article, through the concepts of the freedom-of-contract principle, it is attempted to safeguard personality rights or other legal interests of personality more completely in multiple and diversified contract types so as to give Article 227-1 with the positive significance higher than tort provisions.