判例は、大審院明治44年３月24日の連合部判決において、「相対的無効説」を採用した。この相対的無効の理論は相当強固な判例法を形成している。この理論では、詐害行為は取消債権者に対してのみ無効となり、債務者・受益者間では有効である。ところが、民法第425条は、「取消しはすべての債権者の利益のために効力を生ずる。」と規定している。判例理論と民法第425条とは整合性を有するのか。

　私見では、民法第424条の詐害行為取消権は、対抗性否認権と執行忍容請求権が複合的に結合された訴権と解する。取消権の行使により、受益者は自己が権利者であることを取消債権者に対抗できない。その上で、取消債権者の目的財産に対する執行忍容請求権を受忍しなければならない。

　第425条は判決効の拡張規定と解する。その上で、「債権者平等の原則」の適用すべき範囲を勘案して、第425条は極力制限的に縮小解釈されるべきであると考える。判例の準則および民事執行法上の配当要求の条文(法第51条・第133 条)との整合性を勘案し、次のことを私案として提示する。

(1) 責任財産の保全の趣旨から、差押えの効力は取消しの対象たる財産が不動産・動産にかかわらず、詐害行為前の総債権者に及ぶ。

(2) 換価・配当という執行行為の効力は、不動産については、詐害行為前の総債権者に及ぶ。動産についは、取消原告および訴訟参加した一般債権者についてのみ及ぶ。

(1) The purpose of the work is to harmonize the idea of the judgment of Supreme Court of Japan passed in 1911 with Article 425 of civil code of Japan which prescribes that the effect of cancellation of fraudulent conveyance shall be given for the benefit of all the creditors. That judgment adopted so-called "theory of relative invalidation" which means that cancellation of fraudulent conveyance makes the legal act between the debtor and the beneficiary void toward the cancellation creditor only though that conveyance is valid between two parties concerned. The problem is how compulsory execution is possible for the benefit of all the creditors without returning the object of the conveyance to the debtor. The purpose of the work is to find theoretically how we can resolve this legal contradiction.

(2) The work was conducted by referring to literature, especially Digesta and Institutiones concerning Roman Law in order to study the origin and development of actio Pauliana. And I researched "Projet de Code civil pour l'Empire du Japon" written by Gustave Boissonade in 1891 which formed the basis of current civil code of Japan with the aim of investigating the will of the legislator. Moreover I studied French and German legal theories and judicial precedents concerning actio Pauliana
referring to French code civil and German Anfechtungsgesetz.

(3) The conclusion drawn is as follows. Actio Pauliana has legal complex nature, which means it is the right compounded of cancelling the opposition of the beneficiary and demanding his admitting compulsory execution into the object existing in his place. As an effect of cancellation of fraudulent conveyance, in the case of movable estate only the cancellation creditor can get the benefit of canceling the conveyance, but in the case of real estate all the creditors of the debtor can get the benefit of cancelling the conveyance according to Article 425 of civil code although the legal conduct between the debtor and the beneficiary is valid. In this way we can harmonize the theory of relative invalidation with Article 425 of civil code of Japan.