【作者】 李珏；

【导师】 赵新华；

【作者基本信息】 吉林大学 ， 民商法学， 2013， 博士

【摘要】 动产抵押，是债务人为担保其债务的履行，对债务人或第三人所有的动产不移转占有地设定抵押，当债务人不能偿还债务时，抵押权人可以就抵押标的物拍卖或变卖所得价金优先受偿的担保方式。传统的担保物权主要有抵押权、质权和留置权，而抵押权一般是建立在不动产之上，而动产则是通过转移占有的方式设定动产质权。但是随着融资担保交易的增多，传统的只能建立在不动产之上的抵押权不能满足经济生活的需要，而动产质权又须移转标的物的占有，造成资源的浪费，新型担保也随之出现，动产抵押就是在这种背景之下应运而生的。伴随着动产抵押制度的出现，对动产抵押的争议从未停止过，毕竟传统的抵押一般都是不动产抵押，而对动产只能设定质押，更主要的是动产物权以占有为公示方式，动产抵押如果采占有的公示方式，无法表彰动产抵押权，采与不动产抵押权登记的公示方式又与动产物权占有公示方式相悖，正是因为动产抵押权没有较好的公示制度，对于动产抵押的争议颇多。我国《物权法》虽然承认了动产抵押制度，但规定的比较简单，亦有很多动产抵押制度规则不完善，不利于动产抵押制度的适用。本文共分六章内容，通过采取比较分析、价值分析等方法，对动产抵押制度进行了系统研究。第一章介绍了动产抵押制度概述。本章首先对动产抵押的概念进行界定，因为在探讨一个问题之前，必须明确要探讨的是什么问题，这也是与人进行理论对话的前提，动产抵押的概念是研究动产抵押制度的出发点。在分别界定动产、抵押的概念基础上，进行界定动产抵押的概念，逐层深入，最后得出动产抵押，是指债务人为担保其债务的履行，对债务人或第三人所有的动产不移转占有地设定抵押，当债务人不能偿还债务时，抵押权人可以就抵押标的物拍卖或变卖，所得价金优先受偿的一种担保方式。动产抵押权，是以动产为标的物所设定的抵押权。动产抵押的概念采广义的理解，不仅包括建立在特殊动产（如机动车辆、船舶、航空器等“准不动产”）之上的动产抵押，也包括建立在一般动产之上的动产抵押。其次，回顾了动产抵押制度的历史发展，通过纵向的考察动产抵押制度，对动产抵押进行历史回顾，发现动产抵押制度发展的轨迹以及现实基础。最后比较分析了动产抵押制度在各国的立法现状，即从横向角度分析动产抵押制度的现实状况，总结各国立法的得失，为借鉴先进的制度提供立法例依据。第二章对动产抵押制度的利弊进行了系统分析。从价值判断角度看，动产抵押制度有其利亦有其弊，其在克服动产质押的不足、促进物尽其用，鼓励交易、满足融资的现实需求上具有巨大价值；但动产抵押缺乏好的公示方法，动产抵押权登记公示方式与动产所有权占有公示方式有着不可调和的矛盾，也导致抵押权人与第三人利益的冲突，严重影响着交易的安全秩序。通过动产抵押制度弊端的分析动产抵押弊端的症结在于动产抵押权的公示制度。鉴于此，只要完善动产抵押权公示制度，克服此矛盾，就可以发挥动产抵押制度的巨大优势。所以，动产抵押制度有其存在的价值，而且也不是让与担保所能够取代的。第三章专门对动产抵押权的公示方式进行了研究。我国《物权法》动产抵押权与不动产抵押权同样采取了登记的公示方式，这并不能解决根本矛盾，因为在动产交易中，第三人没有义务去查询动产抵押登记状况，因为动产所有权是以占有为公示方式的。通过借鉴其他国家动产担保立法，着眼于动产抵押公示制度的安全、效率等价值目标追求，建议采取登记和辅助公示方式相结合的动产抵押权公示方式，对于适宜于登记的动产，可采登记的方式，适宜于打刻、贴标签等方式的则采打刻、贴标签等方式。为保障动产抵押权的公示的效力，建议建立动产抵押权公示保障机制，如统一的登记机关、完备的查询系统、健全的责任承担机制等。第四章探讨了动产抵押的设定。动产抵押权的设立行为，是动产抵押权发生的最主要原因。主要从五个方面探讨了这一问题。一是动产抵押的设立是债权行为还是物权行为，民法物权与债权的区分，对民法体系的构造意义重大，物权与债权有着不同的特征和效果，而物权与债权的发生亦有各自的原因，区分物权行为与债权行为也有着同等重要的意义，而在动产抵押设立过程中既有发生债权效果的债权行为，也有发生物权效果的物权行为。二是动产抵押的设立是要式行为还是不要式行为，从私法自治的基本精神以及交易的便捷角度考虑，动产抵押的设立亦采不要式主义，书面形式可以具有证据价值。三是动产抵押权的公示采登记生效主义还是登记对抗主义。这是动产抵押权公示立法模式选择的问题，根据民法私法自治的精神，以及保障交易便捷和安全的原则，亦采对抗主义模式，鉴于登记方式仅仅是公示方式之一种，亦采公示对抗主义的称呼较为合理。动产抵押权经过公示便可以对抗善意第三人，不经公示，不可以对抗善意第三人。四是动产抵押的标的采限制主义还是非限制主义。动产抵押交易的风险当事人自应知晓，既然选择了动产担保交易就应该为自己的选择负责，而扩大动产抵押权的标的范围也有利于债务人融资，因而没有限制的必要。五是动产抵押权的善意取得，这个问题并非是当事人通过意思设定动产抵押权的问题，但是在动产抵押担保交易过程中，也可能会因善意而取得动产抵押权，这也是动产抵押权法定取得的一种情形。第五章详细论述了动产抵押的效力。动产抵押的效力规则是动产抵押制度的核心，本部分通过五个方面对动产抵押的效力做了详细分析。第一，是动产抵押的一般效力，论证了动产抵押的时空效力以及对人的效力。动产抵押权是担保物权之一种，虽然在抵押登记时可能登记有抵押期间，此期间并不是抵押权的效力期间，期间届至还可以接续，并不会致使抵押权消灭。动产抵押对抵押权人来说，抵押权人有优先受偿权、次序权、保全权等；对抵押人来说，抵押人有占有使用处分标的物之权，协助实行抵押权之义务等。第二，抵押权人与第三人利益的冲突与协调问题。抵押权人对抵押物虽拥有抵押权，而抵押人却占有动产标的物，当抵押人为处分，就会出现第三人与抵押权人的利益冲突问题，平衡第三人与抵押权人之间的利益冲突，亦是动产抵押效力的重要内容。如何解决抵押权人与第三人之间的利益冲突，关系着交易安全价值能否实现。公示公信原则是维护交易安全的重要原则，所以，解决抵押权人与第三人利益冲突，公示与否起决定作用。动产抵押权经过公示的可以对抗善意第三人，未经公示的不可对抗善意第三人。第三人应为善意，而且任何与抵押人交易的第三人都为第三人，即使是一般债权人亦包括在内。当然如果未公示的动产抵押权对债权不具有优先效力，还能称得上物权吗？回答是肯定的，动产抵押权虽未公示，在当事人之间仍为抵押权，仍然可以对抗恶意第三人，也具有追及力，所以仍不失为物权的属性。第三，在抵押人与抵押权人之间的效力，可以根据抵押合同进行判断。而抵押人与第三人之间的关系，则牵涉到物权关系或者合同关系，依相应规则来确定二者的法律关系。第四，动产抵押权的效力所及的标的物范围也是动产抵押效力的具体体现。动产抵押除就抵押物优先受偿之外，动产抵押权一般情况下可以及于加工物、附合物、混合物但应以标的物的原有价值为限，还要考虑到所有权的变动情况，具体问题具体分析；动产抵押权的效力不能及于从物和孳息，至于抵押物的代位物，因抵押物虽已消灭，但其价值转移至代位物，动产抵押权的效力可以及于代位物。第五，动产抵押权所担保的债权范围问题。动产抵押权是为担保债权而设，本债自然是所担保的范围，另外利息、为保全和实行抵押权所支出的费用亦应是动产抵押权所担保的范围，至于违约金、损害赔偿金则不应在所担保的债权范围之内。第六章主要探讨了动产抵押权的冲突与实现问题。在抵押物被转让时，受让人的所有权就会与抵押权发生冲突，已经公示的动产抵押权，买受人不能取得完整的所有权，抵押权人可以对抵押物行使追及权；未公示的动产抵押权，买受人可以取得完整的所有权，抵押权人所受到的损害只能向抵押人主张赔偿。在动产抵押权与其他担保物权发生冲突时，应依公示公信原则、利益平衡原则，来确定各权利的优先次序。在动产抵押实现方式上，我国物权法的规定不是很完善，有必要引进私力救济，在通过私力救济实行动产抵押权时，不能损及抵押人和第三人的利益。更多还原

【Abstract】 Chattel mortgage is loan arrangements that involve the use of movable personalproperty as the security for the loan, in which the debtor enjoys a priority claim togains of auction and sale of the mortgage in case that the borrower does not have thecapability to repay the debt. Traditional real rights granted by way of security includemortgage, pledge and lien. The mortgagee generally applies to real estate whilepledge right of movable property is set through the transfer of possession. However,with the increase of financing secured transactions, traditional real estate mortgageecannot meet the needs of economic life, and chattel pledge requires the transfer ofpossession which causes a waste of resources. As a result a new guarantee, chattelmortgage, emerged. Accompanied by the emergence of chattel mortgage, thecontroversy over chattel mortgage has never stopped. After all, the traditionalmortgage generally applies to real estate while pledge to movable property. Moreimportantly, as the real right of movable property uses possession as the approach topublicity, the approach to publicity by taking possession of the property cannotdisplay the right of chattel mortgage while the approach to publicity by registering theright of chattel mortgage goes against the publicity approach of movable propertyright. Disputes about chattel mortgage arise frequently because of the lack of properpublicity approach. Although Real Right Law recognizes chattel mortgage as a newfinancing approach, it cannot be applied to actual practice due to the simple and faultyregulations.Chapter One introduces the system of chattel mortgage by firstly determining thedefinition of chattel, mortgage and chattel mortgage. Chattel mortgages are loanarrangements that involve the use of movable personal property as the security for theloan, in which the debtor enjoys a priority claim to gains of auction and sale of themortgage in case that the borrower does not have the capability to repay the debt. According to the broad understanding, chattel mortgage applies to not only specialmovable property like such chattel real as motor vehicles, ships and aircrafts, but alsogeneral movable property. This chapter then reveals the development of chattelmortgage and its underlying reality through looking back from its emergence and endswith a comparison of legislative status of chattel mortgage in different countries andprovides a legislation basis by summarizing gains and losses of various countries’practice.Chapter Two does a systematic study on the advantages and disadvantages ofchattel mortgage. From the perspective of value judging, there are pros and cons aboutchattel mortgage. It has great value in overcoming the disadvantages of and makingthe best use of chattel mortgage, encouraging the trade deal and meeting the needs offinancing. However, lacking proper publicity approach, the irreconcilablecontradiction between registering the right of chattel mortgage and taking possessionof the property leads to the conflict of interest between the mortgagee and the thirdparty, thus impacting security of the transaction. The analysis of the disadvantage ofchattel mortgage system reveals that the root lies in the publicity approach. So we canbring the chattel mortgage into full play by improving its publicity approach againstthe contradiction. Therefore, chattel mortgage system has its own value and cannot bereplaced by transferring guarantee.Chapter Three makes a study on publicity approach of chattel mortgage. TheReal Right Law stipulates registration as the publicity approach of both chattelmortgage and real estate mortgage, which fails to solve the fundamental contradictiondue to the lack of obligation of the third party to check the registration status ofchattel mortgage whose property right uses possession as the publicity approach. Bylearning from the other countries’ legislation of chattel security, this chapter aims atproviding a safe and efficient publicity approach for chattel mortgage that combinesregistration with auxiliary methods such as engraving and tagging. In order to ensurethe publicity efficacy of chattel mortgage, it is advisable to establish a safeguardmechanism for the publicity of chattel mortgage, such as unified registration authority,complete query system and sound accountability mechanisms. Chapter Four discusses the establishment of chattel mortgage, which is the mainreason for chattel mortgage right to happen. This topic is discussed mainly from fiveaspects. First, whether the establishment of chattel mortgage is juristic act of right ofcredit or right in rem. The distinction between right in rem and right of credit is ofgreat significance in the construction of civil law system. Right in rem has differentfeatures and effects from right of credit. Also, different reasons make each to happen.Thus, it’s of same significance to distinguish juristic act of right in rem from right ofcredit. The establishment of chattel mortgage has both juristic acts that lead to right inrem and right of credit.Second, whether the establishment of chattel mortgage isformal act or informal act. Considered from the fundamental spirit of autonomy ofprivate law and the convenience of transaction, the establishment of chattel mortgageuses informal act, in which written form has the evidence value.Third, whether thepublicity of chattel mortgage employs the Doctrine of Effectism or the Doctrine ofAntagonism. This is a question about the choice of legislation mode for the publicityof chattel mortgage right. According to the spirit of autonomy of private law, and forthe guarantee of transaction convenience and safety, the Doctrine of Antagonism isadopted. As registration is just one way of publicity, it is more reasonable to adopt theDoctrine of Antagonism. With such publicity, chattel mortgage right may challengethe bona fides third party. Otherwise, it may not. Forth, whether the object of chattelmortgage adopts restrictionism or non-restrictionism. Parties involved should haveknown the risk of chattel mortgage transaction. Since they choose the chattel securedtransaction, they should be responsible for themselves. While enlarging the objectrange of chattel mortgage right makes it easier for the debtors to finance. Thus, thereis no need for restriction. Fifth, the bona fide acquisition of chattel mortgage right.The establishment of chattel mortgage right does not depend on the parties’self-awareness. However in the transaction of chattel mortgage, one party may acquirethe chattel mortgage right in good faith, which is also one situation of the legalacquisition of chattel mortgage right.Chapter Five discusses the validity of chattel mortgage in detail. The validityprinciple of the chattel mortgage is the core of chattel mortgage system. In this section the author will analyze in detail the validity of chattel mortgage from five aspects.First, the general validity of chattel mortgage, which demonstrates the time and spacevalidity and validity for person. Chattel mortgage right is one of the guarantee realrights. Although the mortgage period may be registered, it is not the validity period ofmortgage right. It can be continued without the invalidation of mortgage right. For themortgagees, they enjoy the priority right to be repaired, ordination right, preservationright, etc. For the mortgagors, they have the right to occupy, use or dispose the objects,and the obligation to assist in practicing the mortgage right, and so on. Second, theconflicts and coordination between the mortgagee and the third party. Although themortgagee enjoys the mortgage right of the object, the mortgagor occupies it. Whenthe mortgagor disposes the object, conflicts between the third party and the pledgearise. It is an important part in the validity of chattel mortgage to balance the conflictsof interest between the third party and the mortgagee. How to solve the interestconflicts between the mortgagee and the third party is critical to the realization ofsecurity value of transaction. The principle of public summons and public trust playsan important role in maintaining the transaction security. Thus, publicity is decisive inthe conflict resolution between the mortgagee and the third party. With publicity,chattel mortgage right may challenge the bona fides third party. Otherwise, it may not.The third party shall be in good faith, and all third parties that have transaction withthe mortgagor shall be the third party, including the general creditor. If chattelmortgage right without publicity does not enjoy the priority validity to the right ofcredit, shall it be right in rem? Of course yes. Even if the chattel mortgage right iswithout publicity, it still remains mortgage right between parties, and should be ableto challenge the mala fide third party and possess the force of recourse. So it stillowns the features of right in rem. Third, the validity between the mortgagor and themortgagee can be judged by the mortgage contract. While the relation between themortgagor and the third party involves the relation of right in rem or the contract, thelegal relation between them should be determined by corresponding rules. Forth, theobject range of the validity of chattel mortgage right embodies the validity of chattelmortgage. In chattel mortgage, besides the priority of compensation of the collateral, the chattel mortgage right can generally be extent to its processed goods, attachmentand mixture, but limit to the original value of the object. The change of the ownershipshould also be taken into consideration. It should be analyzed case by case. Thevalidity of chattel mortgage right shall not be extent to the accessory matters andfruits. As for the subrogation of the collateral, although the collateral has perished, itsvalue has transferred to its subrogation, the validity of chattel mortgage right can beextent to its subrogation. Fifth, the range of the debtor’s right secured by the chattelmortgage right. Chattel mortgage right is set to secure the debtor’s right, the debtitself shall be in the range of security. Others, including interest and fees for guaranteeand practicing the mortgage right shall also be in the range. Default and damages shallnot be in the range.Chapter Six mainly discusses the conflicts and realization of chattel mortgageright. During the assignment of the collateral, the assignee’s ownership will conflictwith the mortgage right. For chattel mortgage right with publicity, the assignee shallnot obtain the complete ownership. The mortgagee enjoys the pursuing right to thecollateral. For chattel mortgage right without publicity, consignee could obtain thecomplete ownership. The mortgagee should claim compensation from the mortgagor.When the chattel mortgage right conflicts with other guarantee real rights, theprinciple of public summons and public trust and the principle of interest balance shallbe used to determine the sequence of each rights. In the realization of chattelmortgage, the property law of our nation still needs improvement. It is necessary tointroduce self-protection. When practicing chattel mortgage right with self-protection,the benefit of the mortgagor and the third party shall not be damaged.更多还原