摘要： 《民法典》第670条的规范意图在于通过确保借款人足额利用本金来实现当事人之间的公平,同时兼具限制高额利息的目的;而裁判实务的重心则在于后者。本条采取了“本金缩减”的规范模式,并未严格区分本金与利息的不同法性质。实务中,贷款人以利息以外的其他名目不足额提供本金的情形较为常见,法院对此多肯定本条的适用。法院裁判也会将本条扩张适用于借款人返还款项的情形,并不考虑借款人返还款项的法性质。基于本金约定与意思自治的关联,应将本条的规范目的纯化为高额利息的限制,法效果上贯彻超额利息抵充模式。考虑到《民法典》中借款合同的复杂构造,在要物借款合同场合排除本条的适用;这也是利息债权要物性的当然结论。

关键词: 本金缩减, 利息抵充, 预扣, 返还

Abstract: The normative intention of Article 670 of the Civil Code is to realize fairness by ensuring the borrower's full utilization of the principal, and to limit the interest in the meanwhile.And the focus of courts lies in the latter.This article does not strictly distinguish the different legal nature of the principal and the interest, and the principal will be reduced directly because of withholding of interest.In practice, it is common for the lender to provide insufficient principal under the name of interest or other items, and the courts most certainly affirms the application of Article 670.Furthermore, judges extends this article to the refund by the borrower, without regard to the legal nature of this refund.Based on the correlation between the consensus of principal and private autonomy, the normative purpose of this article should be purified as the restriction of high interest, and the excess interest should be implemented in terms of legal effect.In view of the complex structure of loan contract in the Civil Code, the application of this article should be excluded in the case of Contractus re.This is also the inevitable conclusion when the interest claim is regarded as Contractus re.

Key words: Reduction of Principal, Imputation of Payment, Withholding, Refund