Abstract: Article 771 of China's Civil Contract Code Draft stipulates the clause of the return of third-party benefits. When the third party is paid， the interests can be obtained without distinguishing subjective goodwill or malice， which is a major defect. On the one hand， when the criminal booty-recovery pursuit involves third-party interests and requires civil means to supplement relief， the clause causes conflicts between the civil and criminal departments. On the other hand， the transplantation of this clause conflicts with the theoretical position of China's non-accepting-real-right behavior. There are three different types of legislative cases in the comparative law as represented by the civil code of some countries in Latin America. When the third party is paid but subjectively malicious， it still needs to bear the responsibility for return. In this way， it is connected with the system of good faith acquisition. Drawing on the above provisions， our national Civil Code is conducive to achieving self-consistency between norms and theories， and internal and external systems.

Key words: unjust enrichment, criminal booty-recovery, third-party return, good faith acquisition