摘要：

侵权法中的权利并不以社会典型公开性为必要，权利属性的界定取决于归属效能与排他功能。以此为判断标准，债权基于其不同的面向，在侵权法中具有双重属性：债权的归属具有权利的属性，其利益内容主要表现为处分及受领；债权的实现利益不属于债权的归属效能，也不具有排他功能，具有利益的属性。后者进一步体现为实现给付利益相关之债务人意志、责任财产、给付客体及债务人人身。无论是作为权利还是利益的债权，不当得利制度、契约制度等法律部门固然能够对第三人侵害债权提供部分救济，但是从法理上及交易需求角度看均不排斥侵权法的救济；而且基于侵权法的救济与制裁功能，债权的侵权法保护有其必要性。从债权的侵权法保护的构成要件角度看，侵害债权归属即可征引违法性，其主观过错并不限于故意；对于债权给付利益的侵害，因债权并不拘束第三人，因此其违法性应以行为不法为判断基准，经由制定法对行为之特别禁令或违反公序良俗完成违法性之判断，而主观要件原则上仍然需要存在致损之故意。

关键词: 债权, 侵权法, 权利, 利益

Abstract:

The rights in tort law are not distinguished by the characteristics of their typical social publicity，but have been determined by their own attributed contents and excludability.Following this theory，the obligatory right has a dual nature in tort law-it could be defined as the right of its attribution whereas interest in its possibility of being implemented.Since the interest of realization of obligatory right has never been legally attributed to the obligation and those elements，such as the will of the obligor to perform，the property，the object of the obligation，and personal liberty of obligor，have no excludability as to the obligation.The remedy based on tort law has firstly been justified by the legal analysis above and the transaction needs in society.However，the law concerning unjust enrichment and contract law can also regulate the third parties' infringement of the obligatory right.The application of tort law to such cases would be necessary from the perspective of tort law's relief and its sanctioning function.As to the constitutive requirements，the intentional or negligent infringement of the attributed contents of the obligation，which indicate the illegality of the behavior，would be sufficient for the remedy for torts.As to the infringement of obligatory right as interest，it is essential for one to be liable for his misconduct that violates the specified provisions of the law or misdeed that intentionally violates the public order and morals to ensure the realization of the obligatory right.

Key words: Obligatory Right, Tort Law, Right, Interest