受詐欺撤銷婚姻之實證研究

Abstract

我國民法第997條規定：「因被詐欺或被脅迫而結婚者，得於發見詐欺或脅迫終止後，六個月內向法院請求撤銷之。」惟本條之「詐欺」實質內涵為何，並不明確，因此有必要以法院裁判書為基礎，一窺實務運作上，究竟什麼樣的事實主張會被法院認定成立詐欺，又是什麼樣的因素可能影響法院認定是否成立詐欺。 本文首先以我國文獻為資料，整理出民法第997條受詐欺撤銷婚姻制度之概要，再以西元2022年6月22日以前，所有審級之122筆民事判決為樣本資料，透過敘述性統計、皮爾森卡方檢定、羅吉斯迴歸以及裁判內容分析法，進行實證研究分析。 研究結果發現，主張受詐欺者以本國籍男性為多，被控詐欺者當事人則有將近三成左右為外國籍女性；且外國籍女性之被控詐欺者經常缺席言詞辯論，而為一造辯論判決。在主張詐欺者主張之詐欺事實中，則以「無結婚意思」為最多，法院亦肯認此情形該當受詐欺；然多數學說卻認為「無結婚意思」係屬結婚無效，而非受詐欺。另外，「主張詐欺者是否合併主張民法第1052條第1項」、「主張詐欺者是否合併主張民法第1052條第2項」是較能顯著影響法院認定是否成立詐欺之因素；「主張詐欺者是否委任律師代理」、「主張詐欺者是否合併主張民法第1052條第2項」則與「主張詐欺者是否勝訴而能解消婚姻關係」呈現顯著相關。 在羅吉斯迴歸模型結果中，本文則發現「主張詐欺者是否委任律師代理」以及「婚姻長度」，係統計上能夠顯著影響「主張詐欺者是否勝訴」之因素，當主張詐欺者有委任律師代理時，越可能在裁判上獲得勝訴判決而解消婚姻關係；當雙方婚姻長度越長時，法院則越不傾向於解消雙方間的婚姻關係。 基於上述之研究結果，本文認為實務上目前未仔細區辨婚姻無效及得撤銷婚姻之範圍，有所不妥，不宜因當事人之主張而有所誤用，將無結婚意思作為一種詐欺事實審酌。此外，雖然研究結果顯示，主張詐欺者合併主張民法第1052條第1項或第2項，將有可能限縮民法第997條之成立可能性，惟本文仍認為，民法第997條有其獨立存在之必要性。

In accordance with Article 997 of the Taiwan Civil Code, it stipulates that “A person who has concluded a marriage by fraud or by duress may apply to the court for its annulment within six months after awareness of the fraud or after the cessation of the duress.” However, the substantive connotation of “fraud” remains unclear. Therefore, it is necessary to rely on court judgments to gain insight into the practical operations, specifically which factual assertions are deemed fraudulent by the court and what factors may influence the court's determination of fraudulence. This article begins by utilizing domestic literature as a primary source to outline the essence of Article 997 of the Taiwan Civil Code. Subsequently, a sample of 122 civil judgments from all levels of review prior to June 22, 2022, is employed as empirical data. Through descriptive statistics, Pearson's chi-square test, logistic regression, and the method of analyzing court judgments, a research analysis is conducted. The research findings reveal that the majority of the claimant of fraud are male nationals, while approximately 30% of the accused fraudsters are foreign female nationals. Moreover, it is observed that foreign female accused fraudsters frequently fail to appear at the oral-argument session, resulting in entering a default judgment based on the appearing party's arguments. Among the asserted fraudulent circumstances, the claim of “lack of intention to marry” emerges as the most common, contradicting the majority of scholarly opinions. Furthermore, factors such as “whether the claimant of fraud also invokes Article 1052, Paragraph 1 of the Taiwan Civil Code” and “whether the claimant of fraud also invokes Article 1052, Paragraph 2 of the Taiwan Civil Code” significantly influence the court's determination of fraudulence. The variables of “whether the claimant of fraud appoints a lawyer” and “whether the claimant of fraud also invokes Article 1052, Paragraph 2 of the Taiwan Civil Code” demonstrate a significant correlation with the outcome of the claimant's success in dissolving the marriage. In the logistic regression model results, it was found that variables such as “whether the claimant of fraud appoints a lawyer” and “marriage duration” significantly influence the likelihood of the claimant's success in the lawsuit for dissolution of marriage. When the claimant of fraud appoints a lawyer, there is a higher probability of obtaining a favorable judgment in court and dissolving the marriage. Conversely, as the duration of the marriage between the parties increases, the court becomes less inclined to dissolve the marriage. Based on the aforementioned research findings, this study contends that the current lack of distinction between the scope of marriage invalidity and annulment in court is inappropriate. It is not advisable to consider “lack of intention to marry” as a form of fraudulent circumstance due to the potential misuse by the parties involved. Additionally, although the research results indicate that the claimant of fraud invoking Article 1052, Paragraph 1 or Paragraph 2 of the Taiwan Civil Code may potentially limit the establishment of Article 997 of the Taiwan Civil Code, this study still maintains that Article 997 of the Taiwan Civil Code holds its independent significance.