The contract law of china stipulates both institutions of anticipatory breach of contract and the right to plea of unease . this reflects the latest advancement of civil theory and judicial practice in china . the article puts forward , through reviewing and analyzing the specific provisions of the contract law of china , that the contract of law of china adopts the legislation style of integration of both the institutions 通过对我国合同法具体规定的客观评析，指出在立法例上我国合同法采用的是将两制度完整地规定于一部法律中:第108条规定了预期违约制度的两种形式;第68 、 69条规定了不安抗辩权制度:不安抗辩权制度的规定有所突破，赋予了不安抗辩权人的合司解除权。
The author points out that right to defense of advance or follow - up performance should fall under into the category of the conventional right to defense of simultaneous performance ; there is no tenable reason for its self - existent . in order to apply the right to defense of uncertain performance to all kinds of bilateral contracts , and to impartially distribute the right in the interested parties of a contract , the system of anticipatory breach of contract should be abolished and the system of right to defense of be perfected because they overlap and conflict with each other . 作者认为：后履行抗辩权没有充分的独立性理由，应当归入传统的同时履行抗辩权范畴之内；我国的预期违约制度和不安抗辩权制度是相互重叠和冲突的，应当废除预期违约制度；完善不安抗辩权制度，使其适用于各种类型的双务合同，并应将此项权利平等地赋予合同双方当事人；为解决合同当事人期前明示毁约的问题，应当按大陆法传统，设立预期拒绝履行制度。
The article makes a comparative analysis on the origin background , concrete provisions , scope of application , and value of law between the two law systems , as well as specific articles in the contract law of china , expounds and proves that the institutions of anticipatory breach of contract and the right to plea of unease can coexist in theory and in legislative practice 通过比咬分析两大制度的产生背景、具体规定、适用范围、法律价值，在理论上论证了预期违约与不安抗辩权制度可以并存，并以此为基础提出了作者的理论设计。同时，我国合同法具体规定的立法实践也证明了两制度的可并存性。
