| 以下仅列出文章摘要、提纲简介，如需获取全文阅读权限，或原创定制、长期合作，请随时联系。 微信QQ:312050216 |
 |
 |
| 《民法典》视野下让与担保制度研究
摘 要
伴随着社会交易结构的日渐复杂和金融市场融资的需求的上升，市场交易中融资模式逐渐多元化，除我国法律规定的典型担保外，各类非典型担保在实践中亦是蓬勃发展。让与担保作为一种被社会实践所广泛应用的非典型担保模式，被传统担保物权体系排除在外，因此造成无法可依，裁判不一的混乱局面，学界对于让与担保制度的效力及是否成文化的争议也从未停歇。
在我国《中华人民共和国民法典》（以下简称“《民法典》”）编纂初期，关于让与担保是否入典的讨论进入巅峰时期，不同立法工作小组提出的立法草案亦是持有不同主张。随着《民法典》的颁布，让与担保成文化的争论尘埃落定，《民法典》没有将让与担保制度明文入典，而是在担保物权章首次采用区分“典型担保”与“非典型担保”的分类模式，抵押、质押作为典型担保而所有权保留等作为非典型担保，并明确将“其他具有担保功能的合同”纳入担保物权编予以规范。《民法典》第三百八十八条对担保合同范围的扩大，对非典型担保的开放态度，缓和了物权法定主义，为让与担保的适用留用空间。同时《民法典》关于动产担保交易规则的完善、流质、流押禁止性表述的删除以及担保顺位规则的确立，为让与担保制度提供了可行性。
此外，随着《民法典》的颁布，《民法典担保制度解释》同日生效，《民法典担保制度解释》通过不同交易情形列举的方式规定了让与担保的效力和适用规则。同时,《国务院关于实施动产和权利担保统一登记的决定》（以下简称“《动产担保登记决定》”）亦同步生效，建立了动产和权利担保统一登记系统，为动产和权利担保提供了完备的公示系统。《民法典》及相关法律、法规及司法解释新规完善了担保物权体系，缓和了物权法定主义、为消灭隐形担保，担保顺位规则提供了理论依据，很大程度推动了动产担保交易物权体系。
本文，笔者通过对让与担保制度的起源与发展进行追溯探索，明确了让与担保制度的起源，信托制度和信托行为理论，但因为制度缺失，学理界认为其违法“物权法定”，涉嫌“虚伪表示”，有规避“禁止流质”的之嫌，其有效性在学界存在多种认识，我国司法实践中对其有效性从不认可到目前偏向于认可也是经历了漫长的进程，但立法实践经历漫长进程依然没有明文化承认让与担保之制度的合理性和必要性。鉴于此，笔者梳理分析了学界和司法实践中对让与担保制度的争议，明确争议主要集中在让与担保是否违反物权法定原则，是否规避流质、流押的禁止性条款，是否属于通谋虚伪意思表示，是否应当成文化。笔者通过对正反两种争议的梳理，分析其主张之合理性，为后续制度之完善奠定理论基础。此外，如今正值《民法典》颁布之际，但《民法典》并未响应学界的呼声明文规定让与担保制度。笔者结合《民法典》和相关法律、法规及司法解释的规定，分析得出《民法典》视野下让与担保制度的上述争议虽然得到缓和，但并未得到有效解决。《民法典》开放了流质、流押条款的禁止性表述，对于让与担保归属型清算的效力未予以回应。《民法典》于担保物权编开放了非典型担保和“其他具有担保功能的合同”，给出信号缓和了让与担保违法物权法定原则的争议，但并未明确规定让与担保的物权属性；此外，国务院发布了《动产担保登记决定》同步规定动产和权利担保统一登记制度，但未明确让与担保的登记效力和让与担保的权利顺位。笔者通过分析上述问题与争议，提出让与担保制度完善之进路，一是鉴于让与担保在实践中的发展如火如荼，我国应全面开放让与担保制度，尽早成文明确让与担保制度之法律构成及效力，解决让与担保与物权法定原则的冲突，消除司法实践中裁判标准不一的问题；二是在让与担保强制清算义务的前提下，可以考虑开放让与担保之归属型清算的效力，并配套完善归属后所有权变动公示，节省双方交易成本；三是完善动产让与担保公示规则，明确让与担保的登记效力和权利顺位，解决让与担保因隐形担保问题造成的权利受损。笔者以期通过上述举措，完善让与担保制度，为司法裁判提供明确且统一的法律支撑。
关键词：民法典，让与担保，物权法定原则，动产担保，公示原则
Abstract
With the increasing demand of social financing,the financing mode in market transaction is gradually diversified. In addition to the typical guarantee stipulated by our law, all kinds of atypical guarantee are booming in practice. As an atypical guarantee mode widely used in social practice,assignment guarantee is excluded from the traditional real right system for security, resulting in a chaotic situation with no legal basis and different judgments. The academic debate on the validity,rationality and culture of assignment guarantee system has never stopped.
At the beginning of the civil code of the people's Republic of China (hereinafterreferred to as the "Civil Code"),the discussion on whether the assignment guarantee should be included in the code reached its peak, and the legislative drafts put forward by different legislative working groups also held different opinions. With the promulgation of the civil code,the dispute over the culture of transfer guarantee has come to an end. The civil code does not explicitly stipulate the system of transfer guarantee,but for the first time adopts the classification mode of "typical guarantee" and "atypical guarantee" in the chapter of real right for security,opening up "other contracts with guarantee function" and bringing them into the part of real right for security to regulate. Article 388 of the civil code expands the scope of the security contract andopens up to the atypical security,which eases the principle of the legality of real right and leaves room for the application of the transferred security. At the same time, the perfection of the rules of chattel secured transactions,the deletion of the prohibitive expressions of liquidity and mortgage,and the establishment of the rules of security order in the civil code provide the feasibility for the system of transfer security.
In addition, with the promulgation of the civil code,the interpretation on the application of the guarantee system of the civil code of the people's Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as the "interpretation of the guarantee system of the civil code") came into effect on the same day. The interpretation of the guarantee system of the Civil Code stipulates the effectiveness and application rules of the transferred guarantee by listing different transaction situations. At the same time, the decision of the State Council on the implementation of the unified registration of movable property and security of rights also came into effect simultaneously, establishing a unified registration system of movable property and security of rights, providing a complete publicity system for movable property and security of rights. The civil code and relevant laws,regulations and new rules of judicial interpretation have improvedthe system of real right for security, eased the principle of legalization of real right, provided a theoretical basis for the elimination of invisible security and the rules of security order, and greatly promoted the real right system of Chattel Security transactions.
In this paper, the author makes a retrospective exploration of the originand development of the transfer guarantee system,and makes it clear that the transfer guarantee system originated from the trust system in Roman law. However, because it has been considered to be illegal "property legalism",it is a "false expression of will" and violates the "Prohibition of fluidity", its validity has been controversial in the academic circles,and its validity has been ignored in China's judicial practice It has gone through a long process from non recognition to recognition, but there is still no clear understanding of the rationality and necessity of the system. In view of this, the author combs and analyzes the disputes on the assignment guarantee system in academic circles and judicial practice,and makes it clear that the disputes mainly focus onwhether the assignment guarantee violates the principle of statutory real right, whether it evades the prohibitive provisions of pledge and pledge, whether it belongs to conspiracy and hypocrisy, and whether it should be cultivated. By combing the positive and negative disputes,the author analyzes the rationality of their claims, so as to lay a theoretical foundation for the improvement of the follow-up system. In addition, at the time of the promulgation of the civil code,the civil code does not respond to the voice of the academic circles and explicitly stipulates the transfer guarantee system. Combined with the civil code and the relevant laws,regulations and judicial interpretation,the author concludes that the above-mentioned dispute has been eased, but it has not been effectively resolved. The civil code has opened up the prohibitive expression of the terms of pledge and pledge,but it has not responded to the effect of the assignment guarantee attribution liquidation. The civil code has opened up the atypical guarantee and "other contracts with guarantee function" in the real right for security,which has given a signal to ease the dispute over the legal principle of illegal real right for transferring guarantee,but has not clearly stipulated the real right attribute of transferring guarantee; in addition,the State Council has issued the decision of the State Council on implementing the unified registration of movable property and right guarantee to simultaneously stipulate movable property and right guarantee However, the registration effect and the right sequence of transfer guarantee are not clear. Based on the analysis of the above problems and disputes,the author puts forward the way to improve the system of transfer guarantee. First, in view of the rapid development of transfer guarantee in practice, China should fully open the system of transfer guarantee,ensure the legal composition and effectiveness of the system of transfer guarantee as soon as possible,solve the conflict between the principle of transfer guarantee and the legal principle of real right,and eliminate the problem of different judgment standards in judicial practice Secondly,under the premise of compulsory liquidation obligation of assignment guarantee, we can consider opening the effectiveness of assignment guarantee's attribution liquidation, and improve the publicity of ownership change after attribution, so as to save the transaction cost of both parties; thirdly, we can improve the publicity rules of chattel assignment guarantee, clarify the registration effectiveness and right order of assignment guarantee, and solve the right damage caused by the invisible guarantee problem of assignment guarantee . Through the above measures,the author hopes to improve the transfer guarantee system and provide clear and unified legal support for the judicial judgment.
Keywords: Civil Code, Assignment Guarantee,Statutory Principle of Property Rights, Chattel Guarantee, Principle of Publicit
|
