Explore On The Stereotype Of Natural Obligation

The discussion about the natural obligation is becoming increasingly fierce, but these discussions usually stay in the concept of natural obligation. Different views and opinions were expressed, but no unified opinion on the concept of natural obligation has been formed. At the same time, due to the lagging legislation in our country, the theory and practice field did not come to the consensus on the explain theory of this problem. This further led to the lack of chaos and argue with the fallacy in judicial ruling laws applicable to the contradiction. This further led to the conflict of judicial decisions, the confusion of applying the law and the lack of reasoning and fallacies.Based on the stereotype of natural obligation, through the classification interpretation on the natural essence of natural obligation, this article introduced the method of factor methodology by the classification of the current laws, pointed out existing problems in the judicial practice, and tried to find a way out, probded a theoretical basis for the legislation of natural obligation. Through correcting the defects in the debate of the concept, the writer aimed at making a groundwork for rethinking the stereotype of natural obligation.This paper is divided into five chapters, according to the following ideas: "identify problems - analysis and review - types of construction". The first chapter did a simple brief of the natural obligation about its history status and research ideas of this article. The author only emphasized on the theoretical study of this issue, and has no intention to give any legislative suggestions. The second chapter began to explore the classification of natural obligation. First is the study of payment based on illegal causes. By introducing the cases in judicial practice, the author raised questions of contradiction in the judicial status quo. Then comb through the research theory and the research status, by comparative analysis, the author summarized the source of the problems that lead to these contradictions.The third chapter studied on the second classification of natural obligation: the natural obligation based on moral obligations. Like the writing idea of the first chapter, this chapter also started with a case study to lead to the discussion of this object. Drawn through the comparative analysis, the author made a discussion of this problem in detail. While gave a comparative analysis on provisions of natural obligation and donor, the author defined the difference between the two.The fourth chapter gave a theoretical analysis the relationship between incomplete creditor's rights and natural obligation, in order to see whether incomplete creditor's rights can fit into the system of natural obligation. This chapter fully detailed the characteristics of incomplete debt, in order to foreshadowing the incorporation of incomplete debt into natural obligation system.Chapter five corrected that there is no need for uniform the concept of natural obligation, through the analysis of the contradictions and defects in the dispute of the concept of natural obligation. Because it is not a concept can subsumption, but a type. While this type, we can only describe rather than definition.The sixth chapter is a summary chapter. This article had a cautious attitude toward the legislative proposals. Therefore, this article gave no further indication of the author's attitude on China's constructing the law system of natural obligation. In conclusion, the research ended by giving a final induction and conclusion of stereotype of natural obligation.