论独立保证中保证人的权利保护体系--兼评独立保函司法解释征求意见稿

On the Protection System of the Guarantor under Independent Guarantee

独立保证交易中,保证交易独立于基础法律关系,债权人行使履行请求权时,保证人可以以保证期间的经过、债权人提交的单据不符等主张抗辩,但不得援引主债务人基于基础法律关系所生的抗辩权。独立保证的欺诈抗辩是独立性的例外,应局限于极为有限的情形,只有在现有证据证明债权人的履行请求明显存在欺诈或权利滥用的情况下,才予以适用。独立保证欺诈抗辩的具体情形应当排除基于保证合同本身的事由(如单据欺诈),并注意与信用证欺诈抗辩相区分。保证人应债权人的请求而为担保给付之后,可以向主债务人求偿,但不能法定地承受债权人的地位;如其后发现债权人的给付请求不符合条件或此后不再符合条件,原则上应由主债务人向债权人行使不当得利返还请求权,但当不当得利返还请求权的发生与基础法律关系并无关联时,则由保证人行使。

In the independent guarantee transactions, the guarantee contract is independent of the underlying trading relation. So when the creditor seeks to exercise payment request, the guarantor can defense with which the guarantee period has expired or the documents presented by the creditor don＇t comply with the guarantee contract, but shall not raise the principal defences based on the underlying trading relation. The fraud defense of independent guarantee is the exception of the independence principle, and should be confined to limited situation. It shall apply only when the existing evidence shows that there is clearly fraud in the payment request of the creditor. The actual situation of the fraud defense should rule out the situation based on the suretyship contract itself （e. g. , document fraud） , and it is worth noting that it shall be separated from the fraud defense of the letters of credit. After the guarantor paid the guarantee obligation at the request of the creditor, he can recourse against the obligor, but can not obtain the right to subrogation to the creditor; If it is found later that the payment request of the creditor did not comply with the conditions or no longer qualified, it is in principle the obligor that can exercise to return the unjust enrichment, but when the unjust enrichment had no relation with the underlying trading relation, it is the guarantor that can exercise it.