摘要： 根据民法学体系化的解释论准则，传统租赁权对抗效力解释论的三种模式中，移转不能的物权法模式存在外部体系性圆融缺陷，契约地位法定概括承受的债权法模式与有条件的权利竞合模式除损害民法的外部体系性外，亦扭曲了其内部体系。不遵循体系性准则的民法解释论不仅损害民法的体系性，对于实质的权利义务分配亦将产生深刻影响。三种模式中，物权法模式是对体系性造成损害最小的解释论模式，但宜以物上之债的解释方案取代移转不能的物权化解释方案，并对其予以局部修正，使租赁权对抗效力的解释论回归民法体系性的自觉轨道。

关键词: 解释论, 民法体系性, 移转不能, 契约地位概括承受, 物上之债

Abstract: There are three traditional interpretative patterns for the acting against third party of tenant right according to the criterion of civil systemic interpretation, described as pattern of real right law, law of obligation and right joinder, namely failure of delivery, general assumption of contract status and right joinder.There are some logical contradictions within the first pattern in light of external systemic.And the both other patterns not only damage the external systemic but also distort the internal systemic of civil law.We should adopt interpretation according to systemic criterion for fear that the systemic of civil law is damaged and the configuration for right and obligation is badly affected.Among these three patterns, the pattern of real right law will do least damage to the systemic, so that it should be optimal.Even so, we must substitute“Verdinglichung obligatbrischer Rechte”with“Realobligation”and amend“realobligation”.By such means can the interpretation for the acting against third party of tenant right return to the conscious track of systemic of civil law.

Key words: Interpretation, Systemic of Civil Law, Failure of Delivery, Assumption of Contract Status, Realobligation