附物权担保债权人的执行选择权问题探讨

Discussion on the Execution Option of Secured Creditors

附物权担保的债权人实现其债权时是须先以担保财产受偿抑或得自由选择债务人的非担保财产受偿的问题,学说与立法例上存在"先行主义"与"选择主义"之争。从法理和我国的既有规定及司法实践情况来看,宜采"限制型选择主义"的立场:除当事人另有约定外,在并无其他债权人或债务人的财产足以清偿全部债务时,附物权担保的债权人得自由行使选择权;在"实现担保物权案件的特别程序"中及单纯发生"当事人约定的实现担保物权的情形"时,应仅限于就担保财产主张权利。在债务人资不抵债的情况下,应适用破产清算程序或者参与分配程序,其选择权附有严格的条件而不得自由行使。担保人为债务人之外的第三人时,债权人无权选择执行第三人的非担保财产。

In the case of a creditor with a secured property,his creditor's rights must first be compensated by the secured property or be free to choose the debtor's unsecured property. There is a dispute between the theory and the legislation on the 'First Doctrine' and 'Alternative Doctrine'. From the jurisprudence and existing regulations and judicial practice, we should adopt the stand of 'Restrictive Alternative Doctrine' : unless otherwise agreed by the parties, a secured creditor is free to exercise the option if no other creditor or the debtor's assets are sufficient to liquidate the whole debt. In the ' special procedures for the realization of security interest cases' and the mere occurrence of 'the parties agreed to the realization of security interests' should be limited to claim on the secured property. In the case of insolvency of the debtor, the insolvency liquidation procedure or participation in the distribution procedure shall be applied, and the right of option shall be subject to strict conditions and shall not be freely exercised. When the guarantor is a third party other than the debtor, the creditor has no right to choose to execute the unsecured property of the third party.