摘要： 最高人民法院确立的强制执行模式虽能应对相对人拖延返还,但不能直接消解相对人的正当权利。享有返还请求权的相对人将成为撤销债权人的有力竞争者,并借助同时履行抗辩、抵销等制度阻碍撤销债权人实现债权。如欲促成撤销债权人实现权利,就必须厘清相对人权利的性质及实现限度。确保相对人与债务人的返还请求权均可实现,才符合债权人撤销权收回逸散财产的制度目的。因此,需要进一步完善同时履行抗辩权的实现程序,并以此破解返还僵局。此外,还应当允许相对人主张抵销并返还差额,或承认相对人的返还请求权可同在破产程序中一样获得优待。不过,若债务人受领的对待给付或其价值已从责任财产中逸散,则相对人的返还请求权可能会相应地消灭。

关键词: 债权人撤销权, 相互返还, 同时履行抗辩, 抵销, 相对人的权利

Abstract: Although the model established by the Supreme People's Court addresses the counterparty's unreasonable delay in restitution, it shall not disregard counterparty's legitimate rights.A counterparty holding a restitution claim becomes a competitor to the revoking creditor and may prevent the latter's claim by asserting defenses such as simultaneous performance or set-off.To give effect to the exercise of the revoking creditor's rights, it is necessary to clarify the counterparty's entitlements and the extent to which they should be secured.Ensuring the materialization of both the counterparty's and the debtor's restitution claims serves the institutional purpose of the creditors' revocation action—the recovery of dissipated property.Thus, the counterparty's defense of simultaneous performance should be neutralized; if not, the counterparty's restitution claim should at least be granted a preference akin to that in bankruptcy.Moreover, the counterparty should be permitted to raise a defense of set-off and return only the balance.However, if the counter-performance received by the debtor or its value no longer forms part of the debtor's estate, the counterparty's restitution claim may be extinguished accordingly.

Key words: Creditors' Right of Revocation, Mutual Restitution, Defense of Simultaneous Performance, Set-off, Claim of the Counterparty