[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":71},["ShallowReactive",2],{"q-house-110-1-brokerage-law-017":3},{"subject":4,"subjectSlug":5,"subjectKicker":6,"subjectShort":7,"subjectMcqNote":8,"question":9,"related":25,"sameNumber":50,"hasEssay":24},"不動產經紀相關法規概要","brokerage-law","經紀相關法規 · Brokerage Regulation","經紀相關法規","105–106 年 40 題(每題 1.25 分)、107 年起 25 題(每題 2 分)",{"id":10,"webId":11,"year":12,"session":13,"subject":4,"number":14,"stem":15,"options":16,"answer":21,"answerNote":22,"lawYear":12,"explanation":23,"freq":13,"indexable":24},"house-110-1-不動產經紀相關法規概要-017","house-110-1-brokerage-law-017",110,1,17,"定型化契約中之定型化契約條款於下列何種情形下，其條款不構成契約之內容，但消費者得主張該條款仍構成契約之內容？",{"A":17,"B":18,"C":19,"D":20},"定型化契約條款違反誠信原則，對消費者顯失公平","定型化契約條款牴觸個別磋商條款之約定","企業經營者與消費者訂立定型化契約前，未依法提供合理期間，供消費者審閱全部條款內容","企業經營者以定型化契約條款使消費者拋棄契約審閱權利","C",null,"本題考點：《消費者保護法》第 11-1 條審閱期間的違反效果，是「不構成契約內容，但消費者得主張仍構成契約內容」這種單向設計。\n【正解理由】依《消費者保護法》第 11-1 條第一項，企業經營者與消費者訂立定型化契約前，應有三十日以內之合理期間，供消費者審閱全部條款內容；《消費者保護法》第 11-1 條第三項規定，違反第一項規定者，其條款不構成契約之內容，但消費者得主張該條款仍構成契約之內容。這正是題幹所描述的效果，故選 C。\n【逐項排除】\n(A) 錯誤。《消費者保護法》第 12 條第一項規定，定型化契約中之條款違反誠信原則，對消費者顯失公平者「無效」，其效果是無效，不是不構成契約內容。\n(B) 錯誤。《消費者保護法》第 15 條規定，定型化契約中之定型化契約條款牴觸個別磋商條款之約定者，其牴觸部分無效，效果同樣落在無效。\n(C) 正確。未依《消費者保護法》第 11-1 條第一項提供合理審閱期間者，依同條第三項該條款不構成契約之內容，但消費者得主張其仍構成契約之內容。\n(D) 錯誤。《消費者保護法》第 11-1 條第二項規定，企業經營者以定型化契約條款使消費者拋棄審閱權利者無效，效果是該拋棄條款無效。\n【記憶點】沒給審閱期，條款不上車，但消費者可以自己把它拉上車。",true,[26,30,34,38,42,46],{"webId":27,"stem":28,"number":29,"year":12,"session":13},"house-110-1-brokerage-law-016","依消費者保護法規定，下列有關通訊交易或訪問交易之消費者解除契約之敘述，何者正確？",16,{"webId":31,"stem":32,"number":33,"year":12,"session":13},"house-110-1-brokerage-law-018","依消費者保護法規定，各類企業經營者對消費者應負之損害賠償責任，下列敘述何者錯誤？",18,{"webId":35,"stem":36,"number":37,"year":12,"session":13},"house-110-1-brokerage-law-015","依消費者保護法規定，下列有關消費者保護團體提起團體訴訟之敘述，何者錯誤？",15,{"webId":39,"stem":40,"number":41,"year":12,"session":13},"house-110-1-brokerage-law-019","依消費者保護法規定，關於小額消費爭議之調解，當事人之一方無正當理由，不於調解期日到場之處理方式為何？",19,{"webId":43,"stem":44,"number":45,"year":12,"session":13},"house-110-1-brokerage-law-014","消費爭議調解委員會於不違反消費爭議兩造當事人之主要意思範圍內，依職權所提出解決事件之方案，當事人得於該方案送達後幾日內，提出異議，就視為調解不成立？",14,{"webId":47,"stem":48,"number":49,"year":12,"session":13},"house-110-1-brokerage-law-020","下列何者屬於公平交易法之適用範圍？",20,[51,55,59,63,67],{"webId":52,"year":53,"stem":54,"number":14},"house-114-1-brokerage-law-017",114,"區分所有權人會議之決議，依公寓大廈管理條例，除規約另有規定，應有區分所有權人⑴以上及其區分所有權比例合計 ⑵以上出席，以出席人數 ⑶以上及其區分所有權比例占出席人數區分所有權 ⑷以上之同意行之。上述⑴⑵⑶⑷之比例，依序應為多少？",{"webId":56,"year":57,"stem":58,"number":14},"house-113-1-brokerage-law-017",113,"甲透過仲介公司看房，對某一間公寓頗為滿意，想請父母看房再決定，仲介公司業務員請他先付 10 萬元斡旋，可保留優先購買之權利，於是甲支付 10 萬元，並簽訂「不動產購買意願書」，下列何者錯誤？",{"webId":60,"year":61,"stem":62,"number":14},"house-112-1-brokerage-law-017",112,"關於聯合行為，下列何者正確？",{"webId":64,"year":65,"stem":66,"number":14},"house-111-1-brokerage-law-017",111,"依公寓大廈管理條例之規定，下列之定義何者正確？",{"webId":68,"year":69,"stem":70,"number":14},"house-109-1-brokerage-law-017",109,"不動產經紀業者從事不動產買賣之仲介業務時，在向買方收取斡旋金前，未以書面告知買方斡旋金契約與內政部版「要約書」之區別及其替代關係等資訊，將違反下列那一項規定？",1786689135045]