Research On The Application Of The Rules Of Conspiracy Hypocrisy

Chinese society has entered a stage of rapid development.Complex interpersonal relationships and different social forms have made utilitarian self-interests sway.People began to make different behaviors for various purposes,including conspiracy.Hypocrisy indicates behavior.In recent years,conspiracy hypocrisy indicates that behavior is common in social life,but there is no relevant laws to regulate it,causing many social contradictions.Until 2017,Article 146,paragraph 1,of the General Principles of Civil Law established the rules of conspiracy hypocrisy at the legislative level.Now that it has been completed from scratch,how can it be from there to fine? Obviously,this is a process that needs to be slowly refined for existing rules.Judging from the current legislative status,judicial practice,and theoretical controversy,there are still many areas for improvement in conspiracy hypocrisy.This paper finds out that there are three shortcomings in the legislation by analyzing the legislative status of conspiracy hypocritical representation rules: first,it overlaps with the malicious collusion clause;second,it does not effectively link with the procedural law.Third,the absence must not be against the rules.From the perspective of judicial application,the conspiracy hypocrisy indicates that the rule still has the problem of confusion with the malicious collusion rules when it is actually applied.In the case of false marriages,distinguish between false marriages and false divorce behaviors,and intuitively explain the differences between conspiracy hypocrisy and whether the rules can be applied.It also analyzes the application status of the non-confrontation rules of conspiracy hypocrisy,indicating the importance of the non-confrontation rules in judicial practice,and the rules applicable to the rules of non-confrontation rules when applicable,and the third-party identification standards are different.The problem.On the theoretical level: First,the theoretical circles have different opinions on the choice of malicious collusion rules;secondly,whether the false marriage behavior can directly determine that the false marriage behavior is invalid according to the conspiracy hypocrisy;third,the conspiracy hypocrisy indicates that the behavior is confirmed as If it is invalid,can it fight against a bona fide third person.Based on the actual situation in China,this paper proposes the following insights and measures: First,through the expansion and interpretation of Article 146,paragraph 1 of the General Principles of Civil Law,broaden the scope of application of the hypothesis of conspiracy;second,clarify the rules of conspiracy hypocrisy The relationship with the malicious collusion rule avoids the problem of confusion between rules;thirdly,it is clear that in the case of false marriage,the distinction between identity behavior and property behavior is applicable to the false representation rule;fourth,it is recommended that it should be clearly applied in judicial practice.Confronting the rules,and distinguishing between the field of idealism and the field of formalism,applying the system in good faith to consummate the rules of hypocrisy,clarifying the relationship between the two,and clarifying that the bona fide third party should not contain negligence and conspiracy hypocrisy The lessee on the subject matter,and whether the third party chooses whether or not to apply the conspiracy hypothesis;in the procedural law,in order to better apply the conspiracy hypothesis,the applicable burden of proof is reversed.Clearly define the standard of proof and improve the system of judges' free heart.Through the above,it is more reasonable to use the hypocrisy to express the rule,and the rule's legal effect is better.