论文部分内容阅读
缔约协助欺诈者相对于有关合同而言属于欺诈第三人。由于两者的欺诈属于共同欺诈故在该合同被撤销后理应由该人与缔约欺诈方一起来向缔约受欺诈方承担民事责任,但该人并不是该合同的一方当事人致使责令其承担缔约过失责任在我国《合同法》上成为不可能。应当将欺诈定性为侵权行为从而将前述共同欺诈定性为共同侵权行为,并在此基础上确认缔约协助欺诈者应当依照我国《侵权责任法》的有关规定与缔约欺诈方一起来向缔约受欺诈方承担侵权连带责任,至于在两者之间如何分担侵权责任份额则应当根据为其分别实施的协助欺诈行为与欺诈行为在对有关合同订立上所起到的作用的大小来确定。
Contracting assistance fraudsters are third-party frauds relative to the contract concerned. Since the fraud of both is a common fraudulent act, the person should be liable to the fraudulent party to the contract after the contract was revoked, but the person is not the party to the contract that caused the party to be ordered to bear the fault of the contracting party Responsibility becomes impossible in China’s “Contract Law”. The fraud should be characterized as infringement, which will characterize the aforesaid common fraud as a common infringement. On the basis of this, it shall be confirmed that the contracting aid fraudster should, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Tort Liability Act, join the contracting party in fraudulent activities to convict the contracting party Bear the joint and several liability for infringement. As to how to share the share of the infringement liability between the two parties, the share of the infringement liability should be determined according to the size of the role of fraud and fraud assistance in establishing the relevant contract.