年度	2016
全部作者	王千維
論文名稱	種類之債下債務人之主給付義務
期刊名稱	政大法學評論
期數	145
頁碼	257-337
摘要	所謂「種類之債」，乃係對於債之關係下債務人之給付內容僅描述一定之種類特徵而言。種類之債下債務人主給付義務之特色主要有三，亦即尋獲義務、給付應具之品質，以及種類之債之特定等。首先，就尋獲義務而言，因符合債之關係所定種類特徵之任一標的皆得成為債務人給付之內容，所以原則上債務人乃負擔尋獲義務。其次，就債務人給付應具之品質而言，民法第二○○條第一項甚且結合民法第三五四條第一項等規定為保護債權人，提供一以品質為核心之標準，作為債務人選擇其給付標的與確定其給付內容之依據。若債務人選擇之給付標的其品質未達依上開規定所定之標準者，則屬不合債之本旨之給付，債務人原始之主給付義務未履行。最後，就種類之債之特定而言，民法第二○○條亦為保護債權人，針對債務人行使其指定權之情形，除契約另有訂定外，債務人之給付行為原則上須達民法第二○○條第二項前段所定「交付其物之必要行為完結」之要件，雙方當事人間債之關係始侷限於由債務人所指定之特定標的。至於債務人交付其物之必要行為是否完結，則依據受領遲延相關規範以決之。種類之債之特定所衍生之後續效果，主要乃係按特定之債之標準界定嗣後不能是否成立。 The so-called ＂Debt of the same kind＂ refers to the debtor's performance content under the obligations only describe certain characteristics of the kind concerned. The debtor's principal performance obligation under debts of the same kind mainly consists of three characteristics, i.e. procurement obligation, proper quality for performance, and determination of debts of the same kind. Their respective introductions are as follows: Procurement Obligation: Any objects which meet the designated characteristics of the kind under the obligations may become the debtor's performance content. Therefore, in principle, the debtor bears procurement obligation. Proper quality for performance: Paragraph 1, Article 200 of the Civil Code actually consolidates the provisions of Paragraph 1, Article 354 of the Civil Code to protect creditors by providing a quality- centered criteria as the base to the choose object of the prestation and determine the performance content for the debtor. If the object of the prestation chosen by the debtor fails to meet the criteria in accordance with the above provisions, the performance is not actually tendered according to the tenor of, and debtor's original principal performance obligations is not performed. Determination of Debts of the Same Kind: In order to protect creditors, Paragraph 1, Article 200 of the Civil Code prescribes the circumstances of the designating right exercised by the debtor Unless otherwise provided by contract, debtor's prestation act should meet the criteria of ＂has done whatever is necessary for the delivery of such a thing＂ under first sentence, Paragraph 2, Article 200 of Civil Code, the obligation between two parties thus is restrict within the specific objects designated by the debtor. As for whether the debtor has done whatever is necessary for the delivery of such a thing, it should be determined based on the related requirements of delays to take delivery. The derived consequent effects on determination of debts of the same kind should be mainly depend on whether the subsequent impossibility of performance requirements of determination of debts of the same kind to be constituted.
語言	中文