使用借貸契約是否具有物權化的效力？近來頗有爭論；德國法上也有類似的討論。對此，本文從比較法和法律解釋論的觀點，認為應採否定見解；對使用借貸契約不賦予物權化效力，與立法計畫相符，並無漏洞可言。肯定說實際上是牴觸現行法的價值判斷：對有償／無償契約作出不同的保障，並不足採。

The question of whether commodatum has the equivalent legal effect as to the property right or not is much debated recently, which we could also find similar discussion under German jurisprudence. Focusing on this question, this paper argues for negative answer based on the perspectives of comparative legal study and legal interpretation mythology. This paper argues that to deny property right effect to commodatum conforms to the legislation goal, and there is no gap in terms of legal interpretation. To give the property right effect to commodatum is in contradict with the core value of current law, and in particular, to give different legal effect to onerous contract and gratuitous contract is not persuasive.