论附解除条件之契约与契约解除的区别
Difference between an Act Subject to a Condition of Dissolution and the Rescission of a Contract

附解除条件之契约与契约之解除，是法律行为上和债法上不同的制度，不仅定性上不同，法律效果亦不同。附解除条件之契约，附解除条件一旦成就，法律行为当然且自动地失效，而契约之解除事由成就，仅使一方获得解除权，契约是否发生被解除的效果，还取决于当事人是否行使解除权。在一时性债权契约附解除条件时，应结合双方利益衡量对当事人的意思表示进行解释，若解释认为附解除条件有溯及力，则应以不当得利处理；若无溯及力，则应再考虑当事双方利益状态，决定是否类推适用契约之解除的法律效果。但是在契约解除的“折中说”下，一时性契约之解除，并无溯及力。
The contract with conditions of discharge and the discharge of the contract are different systems in legal act and debt law, not only have qualitatively different, but also have different legal effects. Once the conditions of discharge are fulfilled, the legal act will be invalidated automatically, whereas the discharge of the contract will be fulfilled only when one party obtains the right of discharge, and whether the contract is discharged or not depends on whether the parties exercise the right of discharge, i.e., the termination of the “manual”. In a momentary debt contract with discharge conditions, should be combined with the interests of both parties to the interpretation of the intention of the parties to the conditions of the retroactive effect, if the conditions attached to the discharge of the retroactive effect, should be dealt with unjust enrichment; if no retroactive effect, should then take into account the interests of both parties to decide whether to apply by analogy to the contract of the legal effect of the discharge. However, under the “compromise theory” of contract cancellation, the cancellation of temporary contract has no retroactive effect.