【作者】 王铮；

【导师】 寇占奎；

【作者基本信息】 河北师范大学 ， 法律硕士（专业学位）， 2023， 硕士

【摘要】 随着互联网的广泛普及和直播行业的蓬勃发展,网络直播逐渐融入到人们的日常生活中,凭借传播迅速、内容丰富、互动即时等优势广泛受到各年龄层次人群的喜爱,直播用户数量呈现出逐年递增趋势。但与此同时,许多社会问题也随之而来,其中最值得关注的问题就是未成年人直播打赏乱象。近年来,由未成年人打赏主播引发的纠纷事件层出不穷,特别是在新冠疫情期间,未成年人群体使用网络的频率激增,相当一部分未成年人接触到了直播,由于未成年人心智尚未成熟,缺乏辨识能力,在观看直播的过程中,很容易投入情感,实施打赏行为。目前,未成年人直播打赏行为相关法律问题在学界以及司法实践当中争议较大,本文将分为四个部分对有关问题进行系统研究,旨在为如何更好解决此类纠纷提供有益思路。第一部分为未成年人直播打赏行为的相关概述。阐述了直播打赏的概念及特征,并详细分析了未成年人直播打赏的过程,为后文写作打下理论基础。重点探讨了未成年人直播打赏行为法律问题当中争议较大而未有定论的行为性质界定问题,梳理出学界目前存在的三种主流观点,分别为服务合同说、赠与合同说及混合说,同时对各个学说观点的内在合理性进行了分析,本文赞成服务合同说,即认为未成年人直播打赏行为不应认定为赠与合同,而应认定为服务合同,并阐述了具体的理由。第二部分为未成年人直播打赏行为法律效力的认定。分别阐述了《民法典》中针对未成年人民事行为能力的相关规定以及《电子商务法》第四十八条第二款关于未成年人民事行为能力推定的适用,并分析了《电子商务法》第四十八条第二款实质上是对双方当事人举证责任的简单分配,不影响实践中对未成年人民事行为能力的认定。根据《民法典》有关未成年人民事行为能力及行为法律效力的相关规定,分析了影响未成年人直播打赏行为效力认定的两个关键因素,即行为是否与未成年人的年龄、智力相适应以及是否经过法定代理人的同意、追认,结合司法实践中的裁判观点,分别对两个影响因素的具体判定标准进行了分析。此外,探讨了实践中行为主体的身份识别及举证责任分配,阐述了目前存在的主体识别困境及司法实践中对于主体身份的识别依据,同时分析了实践中未成年人一方面临的举证困境,并针对这一问题提出举证倒置规则的合理引入。第三部分为未成年人直播打赏行为被认定无效后的法律责任。探讨了未成年人直播打赏行为被认定无效后涉及的民事责任问题,主要包括财产返还以及各方主体应承担的缔约过失责任两方面。在财产返还问题中,结合现有的立法规定,明确行为被认定无效后打赏款项原则上应当予以返还,并分析了打赏行为的相对人与财产返还义务承担主体。对于缔约过失责任问题,结合《民法典》中的相关规定,阐述了责任内涵,分别分析了直播平台、主播及未成年人一方存在过错并应当承担缔约过失责任的情况。第四部分为针对未成年人直播打赏行为相关问题的完善建议。主要提出以下四点建议:第一,明确未成年人直播打赏行为的性质。我国对于未成年人直播打赏行为并无明确的性质界定,建议从立法上进行完善,为此类纠纷的解决提供明确的立法依据。第二,细化“与其年龄、智力相适应”规则。由于目前的法条属于原则性规定,在实践应用过程中存在着较为宽泛、直接适用困难的问题,建议将法律上的规定进行细化,给予法官明确的裁判依据。第三,强化用户身份审核机制。针对当前普遍存在的用户身份审核机制薄弱的问题,建议各大直播平台设置账户实名制,使用一定技术手段强制用户进行实名认证,严格禁止未成年人使用打赏功能,与此同时,全面普及青少年模式的应用,并将青少年模式与账户的实名认证程序相关联,共同发挥作用。第四,设置打赏冷静期。未成年人直播打赏纠纷案件多存在未成年人冲动实施打赏的问题,通过设置打赏冷静期,赋予当事人一定时间内撤回打赏的权利,可以有效减少此类纠纷的产生。更多还原

【Abstract】 With the widespread popularity of the Internet and the flourishing development of the live streaming industry,online live streaming has gradually been integrated into people’s daily lives,with its advantages of rapid dissemination,rich content,and real-time interaction,it has been widely loved by people of all ages,the number of live streaming users has shown a trend of increasing year by year.But at the same time,many social issues have also followed,among which the most noteworthy issue is the chaos of minors’ live streaming rewards.In recent years,disputes caused by underage reward anchors have emerged in an endless stream,especially during the COVID-19,the frequency of minors using the Internet has increased dramatically,and a considerable number of minors have been exposed to live broadcast.As minors are not yet mature and lack the ability to identify,they are easy to put into emotion and implement reward behavior in the process of watching live broadcast.Currently,legal issues related to minors’ live streaming reward behavior are highly controversial in academia and judicial practice.This article will be divided into four parts to conduct a systematic study of the relevant issues,with the aim of providing useful ideas on how to better resolve such disputes.The first part is an overview of minors’ live broadcast reward behavior.This article expounds the concept and characteristics of live streaming reward,and analyzes in detail the process of minors’ live streaming reward,laying a theoretical foundation for later writing.Focusing on the controversial and unresolved issue of defining the nature of minors’ live streaming reward behavior,this article sorts out three mainstream viewpoints currently existing in the academic community,namely,the service contract theory,the gift contract theory,and the mixed theory.At the same time,it analyzes the inherent rationality of various theoretical viewpoints.This article supports the service contract theory,which holds that minors’ live streaming reward behavior should not be recognized as a gift contract,Instead,it should be recognized as a service contract,with specific reasons explained.The second part is the determination of the legal effect of minors’ live broadcast reward behavior.The relevant provisions on the civil capacity of minors in the Civil Code and the application of the second paragraph of Article 48 of the Electronic Commerce Law on the presumption of civil capacity of minors are elaborated respectively.It is analyzed that the second paragraph of Article 48 of the Electronic Commerce Law is essentially a simple allocation of the burden of proof between both parties,which does not affect the recognition of civil capacity of minors in practice.According to the relevant provisions of the Civil Code on the civil capacity of minors and the legal validity of their acts,two critical factors affecting the validity of minors’ live rewarding acts were analyzed,namely,whether the acts were appropriate to the age and intelligence of minors and whether they were approved and posthumously recognized by their legal agents,combining with judicial practice,this paper analyzes the specific criteria for determining the two factors.In addition,it discusses the identification of the subject of conduct and the allocation of the burden of proof in practice,expounds the current difficulties in the identification of the subject and the basis for the identification of the subject in judicial practice,and analyzes the difficulties of proof faced by the minor in practice,and proposes a reasonable introduction of the inversion of proof rule to address this issue.The third part is about the legal liability after the juvenile live broadcast reward behavior is determined to be invalid.This article discusses the civil liability issues involved in the determination of invalidity of minors’ live broadcast reward behavior,mainly including two aspects: the return of property and the liability for contracting negligence that should be borne by all parties.In the issue of property return,in combination with existing legislative provisions,it is clear that the reward payment should be returned in principle after the act is determined to be invalid,and it is analyzed that the counterpart of the reward act and the subject of the property return obligation.Regarding the issue of liability for contracting negligence,in combination with the relevant provisions of the Civil Code,this paper expounds the connotation of liability,and analyzes the situations where the live broadcast platform,the anchor,and the minor are at fault and should bear the liability for contracting negligence.The fourth part is suggestions for improving the related issues of minors’ live broadcast reward behavior.The main recommendations are as follows: First,clarify the nature of minors’ live streaming reward behavior.In China,there is no exact definition of the nature of minors’ live broadcast reward behavior,and it is recommended to improve the legislation to provide a clear legislative basis for the resolution of such disputes.Second,refine the rules of "adapting to their age and intelligence".Due to the fact that the current legal provisions are principled,there are relatively broad and difficult issues in their practical application.It is recommended to refine the legal provisions and provide judges with a clear basis for their decisions.Third,strengthen the user identity audit mechanism.In response to the current widespread problem of weak user identity verification mechanisms,it is recommended that major live streaming platforms set up account real-name systems,use certain technical means to force users to conduct real-name authentication,and strictly prohibit minors from using the reward function.At the same time,we will fully popularize the application of the youth model,and associate the youth model with the real-name authentication process of the account to play a role together.Fourth,set a reward calm period.In many cases of disputes over live streaming rewards for minors,there is a problem of minors impulsively implementing rewards.By setting a calm period for rewards and giving the parties the right to withdraw rewards within a certain period of time,such disputes can be effectively reduced.更多还原