目前,立法对于案外人提起执行导议之诉事由,只进行了简单的概括性的规定情形,因此出现了很多案外人以及被执行人的虚假的诉讼隐患,为了可以防范这样的道德风险,未来案外人执行异议之诉的立法要尽量去明确执行异议之诉的事由。从理论上来说,案外人提起执行异议之诉的事由是非常广泛的,包括了很多内容,如租赁权、所有权,但是司法实践对于此事由包含实体权利范围的界定与学术界存在较大差异。因此,完善案外人提起执行导议之诉事由,要以推进诉讼有效进行作为目标,规范所有权、债权等实体权利作为执行异议之诉的事由也显得极为重要。 At present, the legislation only provides a simple summary of the lawsuit filed by the non-foreigner regarding the implementation of the executive guideline. As a result, many potential litigious legal problems arise for outsiders and the enforcer. In order to prevent such moral hazard, The law of the non-respondent to enforce an objection should try its best to clarify the cause of the objection. Theoretically speaking, the reasons why outsiders filed petitions for the execution of objections are very broad and include many contents such as leaseholds and ownership, but judicial practice is different from academia in the definition of the scope of entitlement. Therefore, it is also important to perfect the lawsuit that the non-foreigner filed the executive director’s advice. Therefore, it is also important to promote the litigation effectively and regulate the substantive rights such as ownership and claims as the object of the lawsuit.