On The Legal Nature Of The Debt Relief Agreement And The Rules Of Its Judgment

With the prevalence of private lending,the disputes surrounding private capital have put forward the updated and higher requirements for judicial practitioners’ grasp of legal relationship and the understanding and concrete application of existing laws and regulations.Among them,the debt relief behavior as a borrower to achieve the parties to the debt,debt and even the secured claims a more convenient way,in private lending litigation is also common.But the debt is not yet incorporated into the formal concept of civil legal system,and the way of debt is still in constant change and development,such as the present "material" is not limited to movable or real estate in one,even Not limited to some kind of actual existence of things,trademarks,patents and other intangible property can also be used to offset the original claims and liabilities.In the absence of clear legal provisions,there is no uniform approach to various claims,and a large number of litigation involving debt has become a difficult and difficult case in private lending cases in recent years.Although the people spontaneously created a wide range of debt to cover the debt or to guarantee the debt,but regardless of the specific way,the original creditor’s rights and interests of both sides will be agreed on a debt to a debt agreement,want to To clarify the specific disputes in the legal relationship with the debt,not open for the debt and debt agreement to understand and identify.In the case of any of the 15 well-known contracts listed in the Contract Law of the People’s Republic of China,in the case of its understanding and discussion,in addition to the general principles of the Contract Law,In the form of reference to the civil legal system in the existing concept of its interpretation.It is clear that it is not appropriate to have a judge in order to prevent the proliferation of false litigation from falling into the liquid contract on the existing law.After some scholars believe that the debt settlement agreement that civil law on behalf of the liquidation,corresponding to the debt agreement with the "material settlement";relatively,there is the debt agreement "promise contract" appears.This paper argues that the objection agreement should be based on the classification of the agreement itself on the basis of the nature of their different identification of the final determine whether it is valid.One of the more practical classification is based on the two sides signed a debt agreement at different times,will be the debt agreement is divided into the liquidation of the debt settlement agreement and the liquidation of the debt settlement agreement,and in the original debt During the period of liquidation,the various types of debt settlement agreements shall be recognized as Connaught Contracts,which is recognized as a practice contract when the original debt settlement period has been established.However,there are indeed a large number of false claims and malicious litigation,which is one of the main difficulties in the operation of the operation,which is similar to the original creditor’s rights and interests of the parties.It is often difficult to determine that the priority of the creditor who should not obtain the priority in the process of signing the objection agreement is not very difficult to prove that if the non-negotiating parties consider themselves in the court,It is difficult for the judge to make an effective review of the authenticity of the agreement.