CAJ | 학술논문

2012年新修订的《民事诉讼法》增设了第三人撤销之诉，这与此前司法解释和实践中存在的案外人申请再审程序构成了并存适用的紧张关系，学说上由此产生了“选择适用说”与“替代适用说”的论争。根据撤销之诉与再审程序的一般原理，再审程序必须以重大程序错误为再审事由，不可能将保护案外第三人合法权益作为发动再审的根据。如果采用再审程序对案外第三人实施救济，不仅会模糊“案外第三人”与“当事人”的界限，导致这两个概念的混同使用，而且还会损害案外第三人的审级利益。因此，应坚持统一适用撤销之诉对案外第三人进行救济，废止案外第三人申请再审的程序运作。当然，这样做的前提条件必须是扩大撤销之诉的适用范围，在最大程度上使立法目的得以实现。
2012년신수정적《민사소송법》증설료제삼인철소지소，저여차전사법해석화실천중존재적안외인신청재심정서구성료병존괄용적긴장관계，학설상유차산생료“선택괄용설”여“체대괄용설”적논쟁。근거철소지소여재심정서적일반원리，재심정서필수이중대정서착오위재심사유，불가능장보호안외제삼인합법권익작위발동재심적근거。여과채용재심정서대안외제삼인실시구제，불부회모호“안외제삼인”여“당사인”적계한，도치저량개개념적혼동사용，이차환회손해안외제삼인적심급이익。인차，응견지통일괄용철소지소대안외제삼인진행구제，폐지안외제삼인신청재심적정서운작。당연，저양주적전제조건필수시확대철소지소적괄용범위，재최대정도상사입법목적득이실현。
The revised Civil Procedural Law in 2012 added a new provision named ＂the litigation withdrawal by the third party＂, which gave rise to the co-existent and applicable tension of this new provision and the procedure for the third party＇ s application for retrial in previous judicial explanation and practice. And then, the argument between ＂the optional view＂ and ＂the substitution view＂ about the applicability of the two broke out. According to the general principles of litigation withdrawal and retrial procedure, the key to start retrial procedure is the retrial cause, but not the reason of protecting the third party＇ s lawful rights. The legal remedy granted by retrial procedure would not only blur the boundary between ＂the third party outside the law case＂ and ＂the parties involved＂, but do harm to the third party＇ s benefit of judicial rank. Therefore, we claim that the protection for the third party should only be rendered by litigation withdrawal but not by the third party＇ s application for retrial procedure. However, the prerequisite of this proposal is to broaden the applicable scope of litigation withdrawal so that the legislative goals can be attained to the largest extent.