【作者】 王明华；

【导师】 刘保玉；

【作者基本信息】 山东大学 ， 民商法学， 2014， 博士

【摘要】 债权在现代社会中的优越地位决定了担保物权的优越地位,对担保物权制度进行研究的重要性不言而喻。担保物权不仅被动地保障债权实现,而且有助于诱导债权,促进资金融通,营造友善、有利的投资环境。担保物权的实现是否便利是判断担保物权制度良善的重要标准之一。担保物权法的立法及改革,均系以建立高效的担保交易制度为其重要宗旨。20世纪下半叶以来,担保物权法成为民法中最活跃的领域,世界范围内担保物权制度发生了巨大革新。我国物权法虽然颁布的时间不长,但并没有充分吸收与借鉴世界担保制度改革的先进成果,担保物权的公力实现程序运行不佳,私力实现规则基本缺失,担保物权实现制度的完善迫在眉睫。担保物权的实现途径有二,司法途径和非司法途径,也即公力实现与私力实现。本文主要围绕公力实现程序的完善和私力实现规则的构建展开。除绪论外,全文分为三大部分,即基本问题、公力实现、私力实现。全文分八章进行论述：第一章为担保物权的性质、权能及实现。明确担保物权的性质与权能是对担保物权的实现进行研究的前提和基础。在梳理不同学说的基础上,本文认为,担保物权属于物权的范畴,包括两项权能,即变价权与优先受偿权。变价权是物权直接支配性的体现,优先受偿权是物权排他性的体现。担保物权的本质是变价权,优先受偿是变价权行使的当然结果。变价权是所有权处分权能受到限制的结果,其在变价条件成就之前是潜在的,一旦变价条件成就,担保物权人即可以实现其变价权。由于变价权体现了物权的直接支配性,故原则上担保物权人行使变价权无须经过担保人的同意,除非法律另有规定,担保物权人得私力实现担保物权。完善实现担保物权的程序与规则首先应明确价值取向。从立法体例来看,在民商分立的体例下,民法中的担保物权制度更加注重公平价值,而商法中的担保物权制度更加注重效率价值。从担保物权的类型来看,不动产担保物权的实行更加注重公平价值,而动产担保物权的实行则更加注重效率价值。现代社会,由于担保物权更多地应用于商事交易之中,因而担保物权制度的改革更多地与商法理念相契合,体现效率、效益、安全的价值取向。由担保物权制度的价值取向所决定,担保物权实现规则的完善应体现效率、效益、安全、公正四个方面的价值。第二章为担保物权实现的路径。担保物权实现的路径是指担保物权的实现条件成就时,担保物权人通过何种途径对担保财产进行变价。根据不同标准担保物权实现的路径可分为不同的立法模式,本文详细介绍了统一路径模式与分别路径模式、公力救济主义模式与私力救济主义模式、禁止约定模式与允许约定模式。关于公力救济主义的类型,则有严格的公力救济主义和宽松的公力救济主义之分。关于公力救济的司法程序也有不同的立法模式,如对于抵押权的实现,德国兼采诉讼程序模式与直接申请模式,日本采直接申请模式,我国台湾地区采非讼程序模式。在比较法的基础上,本文分析了我国担保物权实现路径现有规则的局限性,并提出了完善方向。现有规则的局限性主要表现在：非讼程序的具体运行规则不明确；质权、留置权私力实现规则缺失；不动产抵押与动产抵押的实现适用同一途径；权利质权实现规则存在法律漏洞等。完善方向为：确立私力实现优位原则、制定详尽具体的私力实现规则、建立多元简捷的公力实现方式。第三章为担保物权实现的条件与期间。担保物权实现的条件成就,即当事人约定的实现担保物权的期限届满或条件成就时,担保物权人方可以实现担保物权。担保物权实现条件成就,在德国民法中称为变价条件成熟,《美国统一商法典》界定为“违约”,并将违约的情事留给当事人通过合同进行约定。除具备其他程序要件外,私力实现担保物权的条件与向法院申请实现担保物权的条件基本一致。在梳理不同观点的基础上,本文对申请法院实现担保物权的必备要件进行了分析,并对担保物权竞存、人保与物保共同担保、担保财产被查封三种情形下,担保物权人申请实现担保物权是否受限制进行了分析。本文对《物权法》第202条所规定的期间性质进行了分析。该期间的性质应为抵押权的存续期间,该期间的计算以主债权的诉讼时效期间作为参照,主债权超过诉讼时效时抵押权随之消灭。质权、留置权应类推适用《物权法》第202条的规定,这是保持担保物权体系一致性的要求,也符合当前建立统一的动产担保物权制度的立法潮流。当事人约定担保物权存续期限的,该约定并非当然无效。如果约定的存续期限短于主债权的诉讼时效期间,该约定有效；如果约定的存续期间长于主债权的诉讼时效期间,该约定无效。第四章为实现担保物权民事非讼程序的构建。新民事诉讼法增设的实现担保物权案件特别程序属于非讼程序,研究公力实现担保物权的程序首先需要明确非讼程序的基本法理,为此本文对非讼程序的基本原理及担保物权实现程序作为非讼程序的特性进行了分析。为明确实现担保物权非讼程序运行的具体规则,本文对该程序中当事人的范围、案件管辖、裁定书的表述、被申请人实体异议的处理与救济等具体问题进行了分析。对于被申请人提出的实体异议如何处理与救济是当前研究实现担保物权案件特别程序的关键。本文在分析不同学说优缺点的基础上提出,对于被申请人提出的实体异议在非讼程序中不予审理,以体现非讼程序的效率价值。对于非讼程序中不予审理的实体争议,应另行通过相应的诉讼程序予以救济。在我国现有法律框架下,被申请人可以通过另行提起普通诉讼的方式进行救济,未来我国应借鉴台湾地区立法例,设立债务人执行异议之诉制度,以此作为解决当事人实体争议的主渠道。第五章为实现担保物权诉讼中的法律适用问题。最高债权额的计算范围是最高额抵押权实现中的一个重要问题。最高债权额的计算范围是指最高额抵押权人的债权确定后,哪些债权计入债权余额。最高债权额的计算范围主要有本金最高限额说与债权最高限额说之分,二者的区别在于本金债权之外的附随债权额是否列入计算范围。本文认为,从文义解释和效率价值分析,我国最高额抵押权中最高债权额的计算范围应采本金最高限额说。不动产抵押权的实现经常与抵押权不成立时抵押人的责任承担混绕在一起,故未办理抵押登记时抵押人的责任性质是与抵押权实现密切相关的一个问题。本文认为,抵押人违约未给债权人办理抵押登记时,债权人既可以要求抵押人承担抵押权不成立的损害赔偿责任,也可以要求抵押人承担合同上担保义务,此时构成请求权竞合,债权人可择一行使。债权人行使不同的请求权,抵押人所承担责任性质不同。第六章为担保物权实现的强制执行程序。担保物权人获得法院许可就担保财产进行变价的法律文书之后,即可以申请对担保财产强制执行。就担保财产的强制执行程序而言,不同国家和地区的执行依据不完全相同。本文对我国实现担保物权的执行依据进行了分析,并主张未来应通过修法或司法解释的方式认可通过公证赋予抵押权、质权等意定物权强制执行效力。担保物权实现的强制执行程序涉及问题较多,本文主要对强制执行申请的提出、强制执行的方法、强制拍卖的实施、强制拍卖的法律后果等问题进行了分析。本文认为,强制执行申请的提出应采“剩余主义”；我国应创设强制管理制度,允许担保物权人通过强制管理的方式实现担保物权；关于强制拍卖的法律效果,当后次序的抵押权人申请拍卖时,对于该物上顺位在前的担保负担应采“涂销主义”,对于创设在先的用益负担采“承受主义”。第七章为私力实现担保物权的基本问题。私力实现担保物权,即通过非司法途径实现担保物权。本文对私力实现担保物权的理由、原则、内容进行了探讨。本文认为,私力实现担保物权的主要理由在于符合经济原则,有利于法律秩序的建立,且并不必然损害他人利益。私力实现担保物权规则的创设应遵循以下原则：担保物处分价值的最大化原则；利益平衡原则；简洁、具体、透明原则。此外,本文还以《德国民法典》和《美国统一商法典》为代表对私力实现担保物权的规则构成进行了分析。第八章为私力实现担保物权的主要规则。私力实现担保物权的规则创设是本文的研究重点之一。该章详细论述了以下六类规则：准备规则、担保物处分规则、担保物回赎规则、以担保物抵偿债务规则、债权质权实现的特别规则、担保人及利害关系人的救济规则,并提出了私力实现担保物权规则的立法建议。更多还原

【Abstract】 Research of real security right regime undoubtedly increases in importance as privileged position of creditor’s right in modern society determines the privileged position of real security right. The real security right does not only ensure realization of creditor’s right, but also contributes to inducing creditor’s right, facilitating financing and creating friendly investment environment. Convenience of realizing real security right is one of main criteria to evaluate a real security right regime. Therefore establishing an efficient secured transaction system is the principle aim of legislation and reform of real security right. Since the latter half of20th century, laws regarding real security right have turn into the most active area in civil-law system and significant innovations in real security right regime have occurred worldwide. In china, the Real Right Law has not implemented for long, and it fails to take sufficient experience from foreign advanced achievements, which results public remedy procedure of realizing real security right runs poorly and self-help rules rarely exist. It is extremely urgent to improve the regime of realizing real security right. This article focuses on functioning of public remedy procedure and structure of self-help rules. Except for preamble, it generally falls into three sections of foundation of realizing real security right, public remedy of realizing real security right and self-help of realizing real security right. The full text comprises eight chapters as follows:Chapter I. Nature, Power and Function, Realization of Real Security Right.It is the premise and basis of studying realization of real security right to define nature, power and function thereof. In our opinion, real security right is classified as real right on basis of combing various doctrines, which includes two types of power and function, i. e. right of appraising at current rate and priority of claim. The former reflects immediate domination of real right and the later reflects excludability of real right. The right of appraising at current rate is the core of real security right, of which exercise causes inevitably the priority of claim. The right of appraising at current rate, as a result of ownership’s dispositive function being limited, exists potentially before meeting certain conditions. In principle secured party is able to exercise the right of appraising at current rate without security provider’s permission. Unless otherwise prescribed by law, secured party is entitled to realize real security right in self-help way.For improving rules of realizing real security right, it should be the objective to clarify value orientation. In case of schism on legislation of civil-commercial law, real security right regime in civil cod lays emphasis on fair value. Seen from categories of real security right, the right on immovable property regards fair value and the right on movables tends to efficiency value. Since the real security right is more frequently applied to commercial transactions in modern society, reformation thereof takes more in coincidence with concepts of commercial law, reflecting values of efficiency, benefit and safety. It is determined by value orientation that perfect rules of realizing real security right shall embody four respects of values, i. e. efficiency, benefit, safety and fairness.Chapter II. Approach to Realizing Real Security Right.Approach to realizing real security right refers that, by what approach secured property is appraised at current rate where requirements of realizing real security right are reached. Depending on various standards, the approaches to realizing real security right can be identified as unitive mode and respective mode, public remedy mode and self-help mode, prohibition mode and permit mode. The public remedy mode is further divided in two types of strict and lenient. Judicial procedure of public remedy has various modes as well, for example, as to realizing real security right, Germany adopts both of litigation mode and application mode, Japan adopts application mode and Taiwan adopts non-lawsuit mode. On the basis of competitive law, this article analyses limitation of Chinese current rules of approaches to realizing real security right and puts forward constructive suggestions. The limitation mainly presents as undefined rules of non-lawsuit procedure, lack of self-help rules of pledge and lien, legal loopholes in rules of realizing pledge to rights and so on. The constructive suggestions are to establish privileged position of self-help, to specify self-help rules, and to vary and simplify approaches of self-help.Chapter III. Conditions and Duration of Realizing Real Security Right. Secured party is able to realize real security right only in case that agreed term matures or conditions are reached. Reaching conditions is called as maturity of condition of appraising at current rate in Germanic civil law, and it is defined as "breach" in Uniform Commercial Code. Unless otherwise procedural factors required, conditions of realizing real security right by self-help are basically in accordance with the ones by applying to court. This article analyses the essential requirements of realizing real security right by applying to court, and that secured party’s application whether or not be restricted in three situations of coexistence of real security rights, coexistence of personal security and real security and sealing up secured property.As to Article202of Chinese Real Right Law, we present that the nature of duration therein should be an existence period of mortgage right, which calculates by reference to action limitation of principle creditor’s right. Article202applies to pledge and lien by analogy, which is the requirement of keeping real security right system corresponding and conform to legislation trend of establishing unitive regime of security right on movables. Where existence period of real security right is stipulated by agreement, it is valid if agreed period is shorter than action limitation of principle creditor’s right, and if not, it is invalid.Chapter IV. Construction of Civil Non-Lawsuit Procedure of Realizing Real Security Right.The proceeding of realizing real security right, added in current Civil Procedural Law, is one of. Fundamental legal principles of non-lawsuit procedure have to be defined prior to study of realizing real security right by public remedy. Therefore this article analyses some issues such as range of parties, jurisdiction, expression of order, remedy of and deal with respondent’s substantial objection and the like.The remedy and handle of respondent’s substantial objection is critical part of such researches. In our opinion, none of substantial objections proposed by respondent shall bring to trial in order to reflect efficiency of non-lawsuit procedure, rather to remedy through other relevant judicial proceedings. In the future we should learn from instance of legislation in Taiwan to establish an execution objection mechanism as major path of substantial dispute settlement.Chapter V. Law Application in Lawsuit of Realizing Real Security Right.Calculating range of maximum amount of claim is one critical issue with respect to realizing maximum mortgage right. The calculating range refers to the amount of claim included in balance after creditor’s right being confirmed. The calculating range generally fall into two methods of maximum limit of capital and maximum limit of claim, with main difference of collateral amount of claim being included or not. By analyzing semantic interpretation and efficiency value, in China calculating range of maximum amount of claim in maximum mortgage right should adopt the method of maximum limit of capital.Realization of mortgage right on immovable is often confused with undertaking responsibility in case of false mortgage, thus nature of mortgager’s liability without mortgage registration is closely related to realizing mortgage. Where mortgager fails to register for mortgage, creditor is able to request mortgager for either undertaking liability for damage due to false mortgage or performing contractual security obligations.Chapter VI. Enforcement Procedure of Realizing Real Security Right. After obtaining legal document from court to permit appraising secured property at current rate, secured party is capable of applying for enforcement procedure. Different countries and territories depend on different rules to operate enforcement procedure. This article analyses the enforcement basis of realizing real security right and advocates affirming enforcement potency granted by notary public on mortgage, lien and so on, through amending laws and judicial interpretations.This paper mainly focuses on application for and approaches to enforcement, implement and legal consequence of judicial auction, and other issues alike. In our opinion, application for enforcement shall adopt residue principle; China should establish mandatory management system so as to allow secured party to realize real security right in means of mandatory management. Chapter VII. Fundamental Issues of Realizing Real Security Right by Self-Help. Self-help of real security right is to realize the right without judicial approaches. This article probes into the basis, principle and content of self-help. The major basis of realizing real security right by self-help is that it accords with economic principle, also makes for keeping order and rarely infringes others’interest. Establishment of self-help rules shall abide by following principles, i.e. maximization of disposition value of secured property, balance principle of benefit and simplification-specification-transparency principle. In addition, this article also analyses the composition of self-help rules for example, as German Civil Code and Uniform Commercial Code.Chapter VIII. Self-Help Rules of Realizing Real Security Right.Establishment of self-help rules of real security right is the key point in this article. This chapter discusses the following rules in detail: preperation rules on realization of self-help, rules on collateral handling, rules on collateral redemption,rules on covering debts with collateral, special rules on pledge right realization, remedy rules for guarantor and related party. Moreover we put forward some legislative advises for self-help rules of realizing real security right.更多还原