作　　者： (孙倩倩）;

机构地区： 郑州大学,河南郑州450001

出　　处： 《山西省政法管理干部学院学报》 2017年第3期60-63,共4页

摘　　要： 知假买假行为是否适用《消费者权益保护法》的惩罚性赔偿,各地法院认识不一,争议颇大。近期,国家工商总局公布的《消费者权益保护法实施条例》(送审稿)明确了"以牟利为目的购买、使用商品或接受服务的,不适用本条例",这意味着职业打假人将不再受《消费者权益保护法》的保护。事实上,保护以牟利为目的的"知假买假"行为本质上有违《消费者权益保护法》的立法宗旨,而且该知假买假者并不属于消费者的范畴,其行为也违背了诚实信用原则,不应适用《消费者权益保护法》规定的惩罚性赔偿。但对于以牟利为目的的"知假买假"行为立法上仍需要更清晰明确的释义。 Different courts hold different opinions cable to the punitive damages of ＂Consumer Pro sumer Protection Law＂ （draft） issued by SAIC on the problem whether the act of buying fake on tection Law＂. Recently, the ＂Implementation Regulations of Con- has made clear that ＂buying, using, or receiving services for the purpose of making profits is not applicable to these regulations＂, which means that professional anti - fake people will no longer be for the purpose of protected by ＂Consumer Protection Law＂. In fact, the protection of those acts of ＂buying fake＂ making profits is essentially against the legislative purpose of ＂Consumer Protection Law＂, and those who buy fake on of good faith, so they However, the act of ＂ purpose do not belong to the scope of consumers, whose behavior also violates the principle should not be applicable to the punitive damages provided in ＂Consumer Protection Law＂. buying fake＂ for the purpose of making profits still needs clearer definitions in legislation.

关 键 词： 知假买假 诚实信用原则 惩罚性赔偿