我国《民法典》中所有权保留制度的探析
Analysis of the Ownership Retention System in Chinese Civil Code

《民法典》出台后我国对所有权保留采用“功能主义和形式主义相结合的立法方法”，然而在既有的物债二分体系嵌入功能主义元素，产生了诸多概念和体系上的冲突。所有权保留的性质应采取所有权构造还是担保权构造尚无定论，如何解读和适用所有权保留的相关规则也充满争议。所有权保留采取担保权的构造下，买受人享有处分权，此时竞存的担保权利的顺位规则适用于《民法典》414条；而出卖人亦可享有处分权，由于其所有权功能化为担保物权，进入第414条第2款的涵摄范围，亦可适用《民法典》414条。所有权保留合同的取回权和解除权不同，且存在竞合问题。所有权保留下行使解除权的条件分为分期付款买卖和非分期付款买卖讨论，在分期付款买卖的情形下行使解除权的条件为在买受人未支付到期价款的数额达全部价款的五分之一，经催告后合理期限内仍未支付的，出卖人可解除合同。在未分期付款买卖的情形下行使解除权需要分析何种情形会导致主要债务迟延，可认为超过50%的价款未支付是对主要债务的违反。
After the introduction of the Civil Code, China adopted the “legislative method of combining functionalism and formalism” for ownership retention, However, the functional elements are embedded in the existing binary system of material and debt, resulting in many conflicts between concepts and systems. The nature of the ownership reservation should take the ownership structure or the security right structure is not yet determined, how to interpret and apply the relevant rules of ownership retention are also controversial. Under the structure of adopting the real right of security, the buyer enjoys the right of disposition. At this time, the order rule of the competitive security right applies to Article 414 of the Civil Code; the seller may also enjoy the right of disposition. As the ownership function of the seller is a security real right, article 414 of Article 414 covers the scope of Article 414 of the Civil Code. The right of recovery and the right of termination of the contract are different, and there is the problem of competition and cooperation. The conditions of the exercise of the discharge right under the retention of ownership are divided into installment sale and non-installment sale discussion, The condition of exercising the discharge right in the case of the installment sale is the failure to pay the due amount to one-fifth of the full price, If the payment is not made within a reasonable period after the demand, the seller may terminate the contract. The analysis of the cancellation right results in the kind of delay in the principal debt considers the omission of payment over 50% as a breach of the principal debt.