摘要： 《民事诉讼法》第114条第1款第3项、《民法典》第399条第5项等规定,不得以转让、抵押等方式处分查封财产,此即禁止处分查封财产规范。为了明确处分查封财产的民事后果,需在法律秩序一致性的指引下,对禁止处分查封财产规范进行准确定位。该规范不是缔约禁止规范,以查封财产为标的物的合同并非无效。该规范不是公益性履约禁止规范,不会导致合同履行不能。该规范不是处分权限制规范,被查封人处分查封财产不是无权处分。该规范是私益性履约禁止规范,除非相对人善意,在损及申请查封人利益的限度内,处分查封财产的结果不得对抗申请查封人。

关键词: 法律秩序一致性, 处分查封财产, 私益性履约禁止规范, 相对不生效

Abstract: The provisions of Article 114, Paragraph 1, Item 3 of the Civil Procedure Law and Article 399, Paragraph 5 of the Civil Code, among others, prohibit the disposal of seized property by means of transfer, mortgage, and other methods, which is known as the prohibition on disposal of seized property.To clarify the civil consequences of disposing of seized property, it is necessary to precisely define the prohibition on disposal of seized property under the guidance of legal order consistency.This provision is not a contractual prohibition, and a contract with seized property as its object is not invalid.This provision is not a public interest-based prohibition, and it will not lead to the impossibility of contract performance.This provision is not a disposal authority restriction, and the person being seized does not have no authority to dispose of the seized property.This provision is a private interest-based prohibition, and unless the counterparty is in good faith, the result of disposing of seized property shall not be asserted against the applicant for seizure, within the limits of damaging the applicant's interests.

Key words: Consistency of Legal Order, Disposition of Seized Property, Private Performance Prohibition Norms, Relatively Ineffective