代持股执行异议裁判的理论基础及规制路径分析

目前,司法实践对于强制执行代持股权时隐名股东(实际出资人)提起执行异议之诉能否对抗显名股东债权人的问题产生分歧,呈现同案不同判的现象。由于立法的空白,法官主要依靠现有的理论来处理,拥有较大的自由裁量权。法院审理此类案件的争议主要集中于是否肯定外观主义理论的运用:肯定者认为,根据外观主义,应当驳回实际出资人的执行异议,以维护商事交易的安全性;否定者认为,债权人与名义股东之间并没有交易关系,该债权人不属于外观主义中“第三人”的范畴,应当肯定实际出资人的主张,以体现执行程序的公正性。通过分析外观主义与案外人执行异议之诉的价值理念,衡量之下应当肯定外观主义的运用。鉴于此,法院在审理代持股执行异议纠纷时,应当明确提起异议之诉的案外人适格主体地位,对《公司法》第32条第3款中的“第三人”涵盖非交易债权人的解释,契合商法基于保护交易安全、促进交易便捷立法宗旨,平衡个人本位与社会本位,以实现公正合理的裁判。

At present,judicial practice has different opinions on the question of whether the dormant shareholder(the actual investor)filed an execution objection lawsuit against the name of the shareholder’s creditor when the enforcing equity shareholding is enforced,showing the phenomenon of different judgments in the same case.Because of the gaps in legislation,judges mainly rely on existing theories to deal with them,and have greater discretion.The disputes in courts hearing such cases mainly focus on whether to affirm the application of the theory of appearance doctrine:the positive believes that according to appearance doctrine,the actual investor’s execution objection should be rejected in order to maintain the security of commercial transactions,while the negative believes that there is no transaction relationship between the creditor and the nominal shareholders,and the creditor does not belong to the category of"the third party"in appearance doctrine,and the claims of the actual investor should be affirmed to reflect the fairness of the execution procedure.By analyzing the value concept of appearance doctrine and the execution of opposition lawsuits by outsiders,the application of appearance doctrine should be affirmed under the measurement.In view of this,the court should clearly specify the qualified subject status of the outsider who filed the objection when hearing the dispute over the execution of an objection on behalf of shareholding.The"third party"in Article 32,paragraph 3 of the"Company Law"covers non-trading creditors is in line with the legislative purpose of commercial law based on protecting transaction safety and facilitating transactions,and balances individual and social standards to achieve fair and reasonable judgments.