论文部分内容阅读
笔者首先分析两个“同案不同判”的期后背书的案例,发现票据法第三十六条在司法审判中存在适用上的差异。随后,笔者在分析两个判决的妥当性基础上,剖析票据法第三十六条的逻辑矛盾。最后,笔者在借鉴国外期后背书法律制度、分析我国研究成果的基础上,对票据法第三十六条提出修改建议。
The author first analyzes two endorsements of two cases of “same sentence with different determinations” and finds that there are differences in the application of Article 36 in the Judicial Judgment. Then, on the basis of analyzing the validity of the two judgments, the author analyzes the logical contradiction of Article 36 of the Notes Law. Finally, on the basis of borrowing the endorsement legal system during the overseas period and analyzing the research results of our country, the author proposes the amendment to Article 36 of the Notes Law.