CAJ | 학술논문

当前我国执行实践中出现了大量以规避执行而设立的假性租约，导致债权人以及买受人权利难以实现，更危及司法公信力。就其成因而言，主要有实体和程序两个方面，前者是租赁权的绝对对抗效力，后者是证明责任分配的错误和惩罚机制的不完善。实务中的多种应对方法作用也有限。比较域外各种立法例，结合我国国情，我国应当通过明确登记作为租赁权的对抗要件以及完善相关执行制度来解决虚假租赁问题。
당전아국집행실천중출현료대량이규피집행이설립적가성조약，도치채권인이급매수인권리난이실현，경위급사법공신력。취기성인이언，주요유실체화정서량개방면，전자시조임권적절대대항효력，후자시증명책임분배적착오화징벌궤제적불완선。실무중적다충응대방법작용야유한。비교역외각충입법례，결합아국국정，아국응당통과명학등기작위조임권적대항요건이급완선상관집행제도래해결허가조임문제。
At present, there are many fake lease agreements arise in China＇s practices of enforcement, so that the creditors and purchasers cannot exercise their legal rights, and the judicial credibility has also been imperiled. There are two main reasons for this phenomenon ： one is the absolute effect of Kauf bricht nieht Mi- eter, and the other is the imperfection of burden of proof and penalty mechanism. The function of various countermeasures in practice is limited. By comparing diverse legislations in different countries and taking the situation of China into account, it is thus clear that we should clarify that the opposing requirement of leasing right is registration and perfect the relevant enforcement systems to solve the issues of fake lease.