长期以来,对于赠于合同究属诺成合同还是实践合同,理论上存在广泛争论,而在人们的思想上更各致一说,无法达成一致见解,合同法的出台并未能使这场争议平息,赠与合同为典型的无偿合同,它在无偿合同中的地位与买卖合同在有偿合同中的地位相当,而实际上人们意识中存在两种看法。第一,当赠与人表示它的意思时,不论是否采取书面方式,赠与即成立,这些赠与应以买卖为范例,转让是必要的,但是即便没有转让行为,转让也有完全的效力,并使赠与人负有转让义务,因此,根本不需要登记,其本身完全有效;第二,赠与人将这些赠与转让后,应为没有采取书面形式,也未采取公正,即不能完全满足合同的要义,所以合同法中规定的某些条款并不适合于赠与合同,这两种截然相反的观点促成了当赠与人收回赠与时产生究纠,即赠与人行使任意撤回权的问题。 For a long time, there has been a wide range of theoretical controversies over the promise of a contract or promise of contract in practice. However, it is impossible to reach a consensus on what people think, and the promulgation of the contract law did not make this controversy The subsidence and gift contracts are typical unpaid contracts. Their status in the unpaid contract is equal to the contract of sale and purchase in the contract of compensation. In fact, there are two opinions in people’s consciousness. First, when the donor expresses his or her meaning, whether it be in writing or not, the grant is established. These gifts and donations should be exemplified by the sale and purchase. The transfer is necessary, but even without the transfer, the transfer is fully effective and the grant Second, after the grantor transfers these gifts and gifts, they should neither take the written form nor take the justice, that is, they can not completely satisfy the meaning of the contract. Therefore, the people who have the assignment obligation should not be required to register at all. Some of the provisions of the contract law are not suitable for gift contracts, these two diametrically opposed views contributed to the problem arises when the donor withdraws the gift, that is, the donor exercises any right of withdrawal.