《民法典》视域下商事一般保证的特殊性

Particularity of General Commercial Guaranty from the Perspective of Civil Code

我国已废止的《担保法》将保证方式界定为以连带责任保证为原则,以一般保证为例外,并视先诉抗辩权为无须主张的抗辩权。这在实践层面导致了债权人与保证人之间的利益失衡,在理论层面背离了先诉抗辩权的实体法性质,是未区分商事保证与民事保证的结果。《民法典》视域下,保证方式应维持连带责任保证推定原则,并对先诉抗辩权的行使法则做出如下调整:法院对先诉抗辩事实承担积极释明的义务,保证人行使先诉抗辩权之意思表示可以默示方式为之。基于此,商事一般保证中,债权人负有向被保证人先为请求的义务,债权人单独起诉一般保证人时,法院应当追加被保证人为共同被告。同时,为不使先诉抗辩权成为保证人逃避责任的武器,当债权人有证据证明债务人的财产不足以履行全部债务或者明显缺乏履行债务能力时,保证人应当承担保证责任。

In the repealed Guaranty Law,the guarantee method was defined to take joint liability guaranty as the principle,general guaranty as an exception,and beneficium excussionis as not requiring assertion.Not distinguishing commercial guaranty from civil guaranty,this definition led to practical imbalance of interests between creditors and guarantors,and theoretical deviation from the substantive nature of beneficium excussionis.From the perspective of Civil Code,the guarantee method should maintain the presumption principle of joint liability guaranty,and make following adjustments to the exercise rules of beneficium excussionis:the court assumes the obligation to actively interpret the facts of first-suit defense,and the guarantor exercises the declaration of intention in such cases in an implicit way.Based on this adjustment,in general commercial guarantees,the creditor has the obligation to request the guarantor first.When the creditor sues the general guarantor separately,the court should add the guarantor as the co-defendant.Meanwhile,in order not to make the guarantor’s beneficium excussionis a weapon for the guarantor to evade responsibility,when the creditor has evidence to prove the debtor’s insufficient property to fulfill all debts or obvious inability to fulfill the debt,the guarantor shall bear the guaranty liability.