依據我國現行法之規定與實務之運作，就行為請求權之強制執行，採取代替執行之方式為之。然而，由本文舉出之案例可知代替執行之方式未必於所有行為請求權之強制執行，均屬適當。因此，在現今強制執行法之解釋論與立法論上，均有必要因應具體之強制執行情形，研議適當之執行方法的必要。從而，本文參酌外國立法例，認為在行為請求權之強制執行，似有併用間接強制之執行方式與調整間接強制方法（增設命債務人給付適當金額於債權人）以資因應。

By administration of the fate of the Taiwanese existing law and the business, the forcible execution for the act right to claim has form called the substitute execution stolen. However, the way called the substitute execution may not necessarily hold good for forcible execution for all act right to claim to be indicated from the case that I took up in this study. Therefore, on in the interpretation of the current administrative execution method or legislation theory, it is thought that it is necessary to examine the enforcement method that is an in total proper mark in the fact of concrete forcible execution. In this way, it is thought that it is a proper mark to cope by having referred to a foreign legislation example in this study, and putting it together with an execution method of the indirect compulsory implementation about a method of the forcible execution for the act right to claim, and adopting it, and adjusting an indirect compulsory implementation method(As an example, build more fate to give a debt person an order for letting a credit person pay an amount of money that is an appropriate mark).