先是英语译稿，后是原文

ResearchonPerfectionofLegalSystemofRevocationRightfortheCreditorThelegalsystemofrevocationrightforthecreditor,asatraditionaldebtprotectionpolicy,formsacompletedmechanismwiththecreditor'ssubrogationtogethertosafeguardthefulfillmentofobligatoryrightsandmaintainanormalorderofthesocialmarketeconomy.Itisdifferentfromthatdebtorsdamagecreditors'rightnegativelyinthecreditor'ssubrogation,therevocationrightforthecreditoraimsatthedebtor'sbehaviorsinvolvedindamagingobligatoryrightsactivelyabouttransfersofpropertywithoutcompensationortheabandonmentofitsduerightstodebts.Thelawconfersrightsoncreditorstosubmitalawsuitinthepeople'scourttorevokesuchkindoflegalbehaviorsinvolvedindamagingobligatoryrightsactively,sothatthedebtor'sresponsiblepropertiescanbepreserved.ContractLawenactedin1999andfollowedjudicialexplanationsprescribethelegalsystemofrevocationrightforthecreditor,filltheblankofrelatedlegalsystems,andcausetheguaranteesystemofobligatoryrightstobemoreperfect.

Thelegalsystemofrevocationrightforthecreditorisabreakthroughofrelativityoffinancialobligation.Ithasmanystrictconditionsinitsapplicationandenforcement.Ifyouwanttounderstandthelegalsystemofrevocationrightforthecreditor,youshouldclarifythenatureofthislegalsystemthatdirectlydeterminesthenature,thedefendantandthelegalforceofthelawsuitofrevocationrightforthecreditor.Thisthesistakesacompromiseabouttherevocationrightforthecreditor.Therevocationrightforthecreditorbothhasnatureofrightofformationandrightofclaim.Theimportantconstructiveconditionsoftherevocationrightforthecreditorincludethesubjectiveconditionandtheobjectivecondition.Astotheactofinsolvency,subjectiveconditionsareonlynecessary.However,fortheactofsolvency,somecorrespondingobjectiveconditionsarerequired.Asaspecialright,therevocationrightforthecreditorcanonlybeexercisedthroughlawsuits.Thereismuchcontroversyaboutitsexercisingscopeanditsvaliditytheoryandpractice,whichrestrainsthepracticalapplicationofthislegalsystemaswell.

Thisthesiscombssomerelatedknowledgeofthelegalsystemofrevocationrightforthecreditor,onthebasisofwhich,inthecombinationoftheaimofthelegalsystemofrevocationrightforthecreditorandthecurrentsituationofChineselegislativeandjudicialpractice,someexistedproblemsofthelegalsystemofrevocationrightforthecreditorarefoundoutForexample,theapplicationscopeofthelegalsystemofrevocationrightforthecreditoristoonarrow,whichcannotmeettheneedsinreallife;theoppositeparty'slawsuitpositionissetblurrilysothatitisn'teasytooperateinjudicialpractices;theexercisingperiodisn'tclearsothatcreditors'rightscan'tbeprotectedwellenough.Toaddresstheseproblems,thisthesisbringsoutsomesuggestionstoimprovelegislation,hopingtoperfectthelegalsystemofrevocationrightforthecreditor.Thencreditors'lawfulrightsandinterestscanbebetterprotectedandthemarketprosperitycanbepromoted.

Keywords:LegalSystemofRevocationRightfortheCreditors;Nature;Perfection;PreferredPayment

论债权人撤销权制度的完善

债权人撤销权制度作为一项传统的债的保全制度，与债权人的代位权制度一起形成一个完成的机制来保障债权的顺利实现，以维护社会市场经济的正常秩序。与债权人代位权中债务人消极地损害债权不同，债权人撤销权针对的是债务人实施无偿转让财产或者放弃其到期债权等积极损害债权的行为。法律赋予债权人通过向人民法院提起诉讼的途径撤销这类积极损害债权的法律行为的权利，以达到保全债务人责任财产的目的。1999年颁布的《合同法》及后来的司法解释，规定了债权人撤销权制度，填补了法律制度方面的空白，使债权保障体系更加完善。

债权人撤销权制度作为债权相对性原则的突破，在其适用和行使上有其严格的条件。要理解债权人撤销权， 债权。首先就要明确债权人撤销权的性质，它的性质直接决定着债权人撤销权之诉的性质、诉的被告、诉的效力。本文对债权人撤销权的性质采折中说，债权人撤销权兼具形成权与请求权的性质。债权人撤销权的构成要件包括主观要件和客观要件，对于无偿行为具备客观要件即可，但是在有偿行为中则要求具备相应的主观要件。债权人撤销权作为一种特殊的权利，只能通过诉讼的方式行使，对其行使的范围和效力理论和实践都有很大争议，也对此制度在实践中的运用带来了阻碍。

通过的债权人撤销权制度相关知识的梳理，债权人的撤销权。在此基础上，结合债权人撤销权的制度目的和我国的司法实践和立法现状，发现我国债权人撤销权制度存在的问题。如债权人撤销权的适用范围过于狭小，不能解决现实生活的需要;相对方的诉讼地位规定得太模糊，司法实践中不易操作;行使期限不明确，想知道 债权。不能充分保护债权人利益等。并针对这些问题提出完善立法的建议，以期能完善债权人撤销权制度，更好地保障债权人的合法权益，促进市场的繁荣。

关键词:债权人撤销权;性质;完善;优先受偿

MSN空间完美搬家到新浪博客!