我国《物权法》第三十六条规定“造成不动产或动产毁损的,权利人可以请求修理、重做、更换或者恢复原状”。对于该条规定的内容之性质一直以来都有争议,本文从分析物权请求权的性质出发,认为恢复原状是物权性质的请求权,而修理、重做、更换等保护方式属债权性质。 Article 36 of the “Real Right Law” of our country stipulates that “if property or movable property is caused to be damaged, the obligee may request to repair, redo, replace or restore the original state.” The nature of the content stipulated in this article has always been controversial. Based on the analysis of the nature of the claim of property right, this article considers that the restoration of the status quo is the nature of the claim of property, while the protection methods such as repair, redo and replacement belong to the nature of the claim.