[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":55},["ShallowReactive",2],{"q-house-106-1-civil-law-038":3},{"subject":4,"subjectSlug":5,"subjectKicker":6,"subjectShort":7,"subjectMcqNote":8,"question":9,"related":25,"sameNumber":50,"hasEssay":24},"民法概要","civil-law","民法概要 · Civil Law","民法","105–106 年 40 題(每題 1.25 分)、107 年起 25 題(每題 2 分)",{"id":10,"webId":11,"year":12,"session":13,"subject":4,"number":14,"stem":15,"options":16,"answer":21,"answerNote":22,"lawYear":12,"explanation":23,"freq":13,"indexable":24},"house-106-1-民法概要-038","house-106-1-civil-law-038",106,1,38,"下列有關契約解除之敘述，何者錯誤？",{"A":17,"B":18,"C":19,"D":20},"契約解除時，當事人雙方負回復原狀之義務","解除權之行使，不妨礙損害賠償之請求","房屋買賣契約解除時，原買受人已支出之裝潢費用均得請求出賣人返還","解除權之行使，得以送達訴狀繕本予他方當事人之方法為之","C",null,"本題考點：契約解除後回復原狀的範圍，以及解除權的行使方法與損害賠償的併存。\n【正解理由】依《民法》第 259 條第五款，就返還之物已支出必要或有益之費用者，得於他方受返還時所得利益之限度內，請求其返還。裝潢費用能否求償，取決於出賣人受返還房屋時客觀上實際保有多少利益，超過該限度的部分不得請求，寫成已支出者均得請求返還，與條文所設的上限不合，故選 C。\n【逐項排除】\n(A) 依《民法》第 259 條本文，契約解除時，當事人雙方負回復原狀之義務，除法律另有規定或契約另有訂定外，依該條各款所定內容處理。本項正確。\n(B) 依《民法》第 260 條，解除權之行使，不妨礙損害賠償之請求，解除契約與請求損害賠償得併行主張。本項正確。\n(C) 條文明定以他方受返還時所得利益之限度為界，並非全額返還。\n(D) 依《民法》第 258 條第一項，解除權之行使，應向他方當事人以意思表示為之；以送達訴狀繕本使他方了解解除的意思，即屬合法的意思表示到達方式。本項正確。\n【記憶點】回復原狀照條文六款走，費用求償以對方實得利益為天花板。",true,[26,30,34,38,42,46],{"webId":27,"stem":28,"number":29,"year":12,"session":13},"house-106-1-civil-law-037","下列有關抵押權之敘述，何者正確？",37,{"webId":31,"stem":32,"number":33,"year":12,"session":13},"house-106-1-civil-law-039","下列有關相鄰關係之敘述，何者錯誤？",39,{"webId":35,"stem":36,"number":37,"year":12,"session":13},"house-106-1-civil-law-036","下列有關租賃契約之敘述，何者錯誤？",36,{"webId":39,"stem":40,"number":41,"year":12,"session":13},"house-106-1-civil-law-040","下列有關人格權之敘述，何者錯誤？",40,{"webId":43,"stem":44,"number":45,"year":12,"session":13},"house-106-1-civil-law-035","下列有關意思表示之敘述，何者錯誤？",35,{"webId":47,"stem":48,"number":13,"year":49,"session":13},"house-107-1-civil-law-001","甲有 A、B、C 三台車，以總價 50 萬元出售給乙，其後甲將其對乙的債權贈與於丙，並讓與之。於乙將 50 萬元現金支付於丙後，甲將 A、B、C 三台車交付給乙並移轉所有權。試問甲、乙、丙間共有多少法律行為？",107,[51],{"webId":52,"year":53,"stem":54,"number":14},"house-105-1-civil-law-038",105,"甲乙為夫妻育有二女丙與丁，甲為傳香火認識已婚之戊女，同居一年後生下己男，甲把己接回家中同住將其養育成人，但丙與己相處極為不睦，丙亦曾對己口出穢言且被判刑確定，某日丙與己再起爭執，己一時失手將丙刺成重傷，丁見狀，起身亦把己刺成重傷，丁與己嗣後雙雙被判重刑確定，乙為此人倫悲劇在眾人前以不堪字眼侮辱甲，甲亦默默承受，但隔日即因傷心過度辭世。試問本案中，何人對甲無繼承權？",1786689128242]