【摘要】：隨著市場經(jīng)濟的不斷發(fā)展，在網(wǎng)絡商城中購買商品已經(jīng)逐步成為新一代推崇的主流消費方式之一。在網(wǎng)絡交易中，消費者與經(jīng)營者之間信息不對稱的情況更加突出，這種消費方式在為消費者帶來很多便利的同時，也帶來很多問題。2014年3月15日起實施的《消費者權(quán)益保護法》首次在法律中規(guī)定了遠程購物的消費者享有后悔權(quán)，但立法并沒有一蹴而就解決所有問題。對網(wǎng)絡購物后悔權(quán)進行研究、完善我國相關制度不僅可以使網(wǎng)絡消費市場更加規(guī)范，而且可以促進網(wǎng)絡經(jīng)營者的良性競爭，節(jié)約社會成本。 本文在分析網(wǎng)絡購物后悔權(quán)的理論依據(jù)時，引入經(jīng)濟學分析方法，具有一定創(chuàng)新性。文章通過對消費者網(wǎng)絡購物后悔權(quán)的產(chǎn)生過程以及發(fā)展過程進行闡述，明確了網(wǎng)絡購物消費者后悔權(quán)是消費者通過網(wǎng)絡完成商品交易之后，依法在一定期限內(nèi)享有的單方面撤銷原合同、并將已購買商品退還給經(jīng)營者的權(quán)利，，且不用承擔任何責任，由此得出后悔權(quán)具有法定性、無因性、免責性、單方性等性質(zhì)。通過將后悔權(quán)制度和民法上其他相似的法定權(quán)利進行區(qū)別，明確了消費者網(wǎng)絡購物后悔權(quán)是消費者基本權(quán)利的延伸，是經(jīng)濟法范疇的權(quán)利。在此基礎上，運用經(jīng)濟學、法學理論分析方法以及矛盾分析法，明確了網(wǎng)絡購物后悔權(quán)立法不僅在經(jīng)濟學理論的角度和法學理論的角度都有充足的理論支撐，也有利于個體經(jīng)濟效率和整體經(jīng)濟效率的實現(xiàn)、有利于消費市場實質(zhì)公平的實現(xiàn)。同時強調(diào)了消費者網(wǎng)絡購物后悔權(quán)的行使也不能隨心所欲，也應當從適用商品范圍、行使期間、行使方式、消費者責任承擔等方面對其加以限制。我國消費者網(wǎng)絡購物后悔權(quán)的制度規(guī)定中存在商品適用范圍規(guī)定較為籠統(tǒng)、行使期限規(guī)定較為單一、行使方式不明確、責任承擔規(guī)定不詳細等漏洞。針對以上問題，借鑒德國、英國、美國及日本等國家消費者后悔權(quán)的行使方式、行使期間、行使的法律后果與責任承擔以及權(quán)利濫用禁止等方面的制度經(jīng)驗，為我國相關制度完善和網(wǎng)絡購物消費者后悔權(quán)的運用和落實提出了一系列具有可操作性的建議，包括：限定消費者和經(jīng)營者范圍，并將權(quán)利適用范圍擴大到服務，以細化消費者網(wǎng)絡購物后悔權(quán)的適用范圍；將法律規(guī)定的7天后悔期間定為工作日，并規(guī)定行使期限與經(jīng)營者告知義務的履行情況相關，對沒有履行必要信息告知義務的，將行使期限延長至14天，從而規(guī)范網(wǎng)絡購物后悔權(quán)的行使期限；明確消費者網(wǎng)絡購物后悔權(quán)的行使方式為書面通知和直接退貨兩種方式；完善消費者行使網(wǎng)絡購物后悔權(quán)的責任承擔，規(guī)定消費者網(wǎng)絡購物后悔權(quán)的舉證責任由經(jīng)營者承擔，同時允許經(jīng)營者在面臨惡意行使后悔權(quán)時，也可以訴諸法律途徑；完善網(wǎng)絡環(huán)境下的經(jīng)營者信用評價體系；加強實名制管理；完善網(wǎng)絡環(huán)境下的個人信用記錄等。
[Abstract]:With the development of market economy, buying goods in the network shopping mall has gradually become one of the mainstream consumption modes of the new generation. In the network transaction, the information asymmetry between the consumer and the operator is more prominent, this kind of consumption mode brings a lot of convenience to the consumer at the same time, The Consumer Rights and interests Protection Act, which came into effect on March 15, 2014, provides for the first time that consumers who shop remotely have the right to regret, but the legislation does not solve all problems overnight. The research on the right of repentance of online shopping and the perfection of the relevant system of our country can not only make the network consumption market more standardized, but also promote the benign competition of network operators and save the social cost. When analyzing the theoretical basis of the right of regret in online shopping, this paper introduces the method of economic analysis, which is innovative. By expounding the process and developing process of consumers' online shopping regret right, the article clarifies that the online shopping consumers' regret right is after the consumer completes the commodity transaction through the network. The unilateral rescission of the original contract in accordance with the law within a certain period of time, and the right to return the purchased goods to the operator, without any liability, leads to the conclusion that the right of regret has the nature of legality, non-causality, exemption, and unilateral nature. By differentiating the right of regret system from other similar legal rights in civil law, it is clear that the right of consumers' online shopping regret is the extension of consumers' basic rights and the right of economic law. On this basis, using economics, law theory analysis method and contradiction analysis method, it is clear that network shopping regret right legislation has sufficient theoretical support not only from the angle of economic theory but also from the angle of law theory. It is also conducive to the realization of individual economic efficiency and overall economic efficiency, and to the realization of substantial fairness in the consumer market. At the same time, it emphasizes that the exercise of consumers' right of online shopping regret can not be arbitrary, and should be restricted from the scope of applicable commodities, the period of exercise, the way of exercising, the responsibility of consumers and so on. In our country, there are some loopholes in the system of consumer's right of online shopping regret, such as the general provisions of the applicable scope of commodities, the single term of exercise, the unclear way of exercising, the lack of detailed provisions on responsibility assumption, and so on. In view of the above problems, the author draws lessons from the system experience of the exercise of the right of consumer regret in Germany, the United Kingdom, the United States and Japan, the legal consequences and liability of the exercise during the exercise, and the prohibition of abuse of rights, etc. This paper puts forward a series of operable suggestions for the perfection of relevant system and the application and implementation of online shopping consumer's regret right, including: limiting the scope of consumer and operator, and extending the scope of application of right to service. In order to refine the scope of consumer online shopping regret rights; The period of 7 days of regret prescribed by law shall be set as a working day, and the period of exercise shall be related to the performance of the operator's obligation to inform, and if the obligation of notification of necessary information has not been fulfilled, the period of exercise shall be extended to 14 days, In order to regulate the exercise of the right of online shopping regret; It is clear that the exercise of consumers' right to regret shopping online is written notice and direct return. Perfecting the responsibility of consumers to exercise the right to regret online shopping, stipulating that the burden of proof of consumers' right to regret online shopping is borne by the operator, at the same time allowing the operators to resort to legal channels when they are faced with the malicious exercise of the right of regret; Improve the credit evaluation system of operators under the network environment; strengthen the management of real name system; perfect the personal credit records under the network environment.
【學位授予單位】：山西財經(jīng)大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2015
【分類號】：D923.8

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 張學哲;;消費者撤回權(quán)制度與合同自由原則——以中國民法法典化為背景[J];比較法研究;2009年06期

2 金勵;;消費者商品交易反悔權(quán)之研究[J];重慶交通大學學報(社會科學版);2007年01期

3 劉廷華;;法經(jīng)濟學視野的消費者后悔權(quán)及其立法構(gòu)想[J];重慶社會科學;2010年01期

4 李友根;論經(jīng)濟法主體[J];當代法學;2004年01期

5 寧雙;;消費者權(quán)益保護法中后悔權(quán)制度的淺析[J];東方企業(yè)文化;2011年06期

6 汪傳才;;分時度假的消費者保護初探[J];法律科學.西北政法學院學報;2006年04期

7 周顯志,陳小龍;試論消費信用合同的“冷卻期”制度[J];法商研究;2002年05期

8 趙紅梅;;經(jīng)營者義務:對誰負擔的義務——《中華人民共和國消費者權(quán)益保護法》修訂的社會法理路[J];法商研究;2010年04期

9 梁慧星;中國的消費者政策和消費者立法[J];法學;2000年05期

10 侯先鋒;;論后悔權(quán)制度實施的保障[J];阜陽師范學院學報(社會科學版);2009年05期

本文編號：2363566