登记对抗模式的典型情况是特殊动产的物权变动。在这种物权变动中,交付才是特殊动产物权变动的形式要件,登记对物权变动本身没有影响,只是对特殊动产的物权变动的公示。另外,从我国物权法现有的一物一权、物权债权区分的原则出发,明确登记对抗和善意取得等制度的界限后,可以发现我国法不承认多个所有权同时存在,而登记对抗模式中的登记也不能产生让后来买受人取得所有权的效果。这样,实体法上的所有权只能停留在在先权利人处。如此,在解释对抗时,可将对抗理解为是在诉讼层面发挥作用的制度,是一种诉讼中的抗辩权,是第二买受人在面对第一买受人时保护自己的一种手段。在我国的体系下,登记对抗制度的解释很难做到逻辑上的完全周延,相对而言,柄建为抗辩权的副作用较小,是一种比较合适的解释方法。而且,通过对第三人范围的界定以及善意取得制度的配合,登记对抗制度可能产生的问题会被进一步限制。 A typical case of a registered confrontation pattern is a change in the real property of a special movable property. In this change of real right, the delivery is the formal element of the change of the real right of real property. The registration has no influence on the change of the real right and is only the publicity of the change of the real right of the special movable property. In addition, starting from the existing principle of “one thing, one thing” and “right of property” in our country’s property law, and clearly defining the limits of such systems as confrontation and goodwill acquisition, we can find that our law does not recognize the simultaneous existence of multiple ownership rights. The registration does not produce the effect of later ownership by the buyer. Thus, the substantive law of ownership can only stay in the previous rights holders. Thus, when interpreting confrontation, confrontation can be understood as a system that functions at the level of litigation, as a counter-claim in litigation, as a second buyer’s protection of himself in the face of the first buyer means. Under the system of our country, it is very difficult to logically complete the explanation of the system of registration confrontation. Relatively speaking, the less side-effect of establishing the counter-claim is a more appropriate method of interpretation. Moreover, through the definition of the scope of the third party and the cooperation of the goodwill acquisition system, the possible problems of registering the confrontation system will be further restricted.