摘要： 请托是一种约定，牵涉合同效力、费用归属、缔约过失等问题，应受民法规制。由于民法规范对此付之阙如，民法规制请托应通过民事裁判为之，因势利导以厚植法治社会之根基。请托主要有铨叙请托、入学请托、关说请托、办证办资请托、借名请托、媒体公关请托、暴力讨债请托、枪手请托等类型。请托在民法上应定性为委托关系。关于请托的效力，或违背法律禁止性规定，或有悖于公序良俗，应分情况依据《合同法》第52条第5项或第4项以及《民法总则》第153条判定其效力。对于请托费用的归属，应在合同效力判定的基础上，辅之以个案衡量，区别适用“返还”“不法原因给付”不予返还和“收缴”三种模式。

关键词: 请托, 民法规制, 公序良俗, 收缴

Abstract: Solicitation is a kind of agreement involving such questions as the validity of the contract, the attribution of fees and the culpa in contrahendo. Considering the lack of civil provisions concerned with this problem, the regulation should be adopted through civil judgment and thus the base of the society governed by rule of law can be strengthened. Solicitation can be classified into different categories including solicitation of official positions, school admission solicitation, solicitation of influencing judicial judgment or administrative procedures, solicitation of qualification, solicitation about assuming other's name, solicitation of taking advantage of media relations to influence the judicial or administrative procedures, solicitation of debt collection via violence, and solicitation of examination impostor. The solicitation should be defined as commission in civil law. The validity of solicitation which can violate the mandatory provisions or pubic order and fine custom should be determined according to the article 54 subparagraph 4 or 5 of the contract law and the article 153 of the General Provisions of the Civil Law of the People's Republic of China. Three models including return, not-return in case of illegal payment and seizure can be applied to the attribution of fees on the base of the validity of the contract and the evaluation of the particular characteristics of specific cases.

Key words: Solicitation, Regulation by Civil Law, Validity, Take over