【作者】 周群；

【导师】 李建华；

【作者基本信息】 吉林大学 ， 法律， 2004， 硕士

【摘要】 本文是一篇讨论强制执行拍卖问题的论文。针对当前强制执行拍卖在法院执行程序中的地位愈来愈受到重视，而国内对强制执行拍卖的法律规定与理论研究相距甚远这一具体现象，通过对国外的立法借鉴，结合自己的工作实践，试图研究强制执行拍卖的概念、性质、拍卖的实施、对拍卖不动产上的抵押权、用益物权的处理、强制执行拍卖的法律效力等问题，促使我国法学理论界对此问题加以重视，更好地指导司法实践，特别是对强制执行的立法问题具有重要意义。论文共分四个部分。第一部分概述了强制执行拍卖的概念及其性质。首先，阐述了强制执行拍卖的概念。拍卖分为任意拍卖和强制拍卖，作为强制执行程序中的拍卖与一般意义上的拍卖不同，它属于强制拍卖的一种，是指法院将查封的债务人财产，在债务人逾期不履行债务时，依法以公开竞价的方式卖与出价最高的应买人，并用所得价金清偿执行债权的行为。而一般意义上的拍卖，是指《拍卖法》中规定的以公开竞价的方式，将物品或财产权利卖于最高出价者的买卖方式，是拍卖企业的经营活动。其次，是关于强制执行拍卖的性质。本文通过借鉴国外立法和我国台湾地区学者的有关理论，提出了关于强制执行拍卖性质的三种学说，即私法说、公法说、折衷说。私法说认为强制执行拍卖是私法行为，属于买卖的一种。公法说认为强制执行拍卖是依据公法所实施的，属于公法行为。折衷说是对私法说和公法说的调和折衷，认为强制执行<WP=42>拍卖实质上具有双重性质，一方面是公法上的强制处分，另一方面又具有私法上的买卖性质和效果。因强制执行拍卖是基于国家公权力所实施的行为，故笔者赞成公法说理论。第二部分概述了强制执行拍卖的程序。因为目前我国对强制执行拍卖的具体实施缺乏相关的法律规定，因此有必要借鉴国外的立法加以研究，以使法院执行程序中的强制执行拍卖有章可循。本文根据国外的法律规定及自己在工作中总结的实践经验，提出了法院执行程序中实施强制拍卖所应遵循的具体程序。首先是强制执行拍卖的准备程序。法院在实施强制拍卖前，应当委托评估机构对拍卖标的物作出价格评估、确定拍卖底价和保证金、指定拍卖的期日、通知当事人到场、发布拍卖公告。其次是强制执行拍卖的实施程序。论述了强制执行拍卖的实施主体，以及实施过程中如何拍定和无人竞买时的处理。依我国现行的法律规定，法院强制执行中的拍卖一律委托拍卖企业进行，由拍卖企业的拍卖人员来主持。文中通过对强制执行拍卖由拍卖企业作为实施主体与法院作为实施主体的比较，阐明了法院强制执行中的拍卖由法院主持实施更为有利的观点。执行程序中拍卖标的物最高价的确定，关系到债权人金钱债权的实现程度，因此拍定前应践行一定的程序。执行标的物经拍卖后无人竞买的，可再行拍卖或交债权人承受。第三部分概述了强制执行拍卖中对不动产上权利负担的处理。一是论述了对不动产上权利负担的处理原则。通过对各国立法上的承受主义、涂消主义、剩余主义三种不同处理原则优缺点的分析论证，阐述了在剩余主义限制下用益物权、租赁权随同转移，即采承受主义，抵押权因拍卖而消灭，<WP=43>采消灭主义的观点。二是对我国强制执行立法中对不动产上权利负担的处理原则进行了构想。建议我国强制执行法应确立在剩余主义限制下的承受原则和涂消原则。在剩余主义限制下，对用益物权、租赁权采承受原则，对担保物权采涂消原则。同时，应确立无益拍卖之禁止制度，并应赋予债权人以异议权。第四部分概述了强制执行拍卖的法律效力。这部分共分三方面的内容：其一，论述了价金交付的法律效力。阐明了拍卖成交后，拍定人应交付价金的时间、方式以及不及时缴纳价金的效果。原拍定人不及时缴纳价金的，再行拍卖时不得竞买，并应承担再行拍卖的差额部分。其二，论述了拍定人因法院强制执行拍卖取得拍卖标的物所有权的性质、时点及拍卖标的物的交付。依公法说理论，因法院强制执行拍卖取得的拍卖标的物所有权性质为原始取得。在拍定后，无论执行债权在实体上是否存在，也不论拍卖标的物是否为债务人所有，均不能影响拍定人就拍卖标的物取得的所有权。拍卖标的物所有权取得的时点及交付，对动产和不动产分别加以论述。在动产拍卖中，执行法院应在拍定人缴足价金后及时将拍卖标的物交付给拍定人，并以交付时间为所有权取得的时点。不能及时交付的，则执行法院应在规定时间内交付。在不动产拍卖中，执行法院应在拍定人缴足价金后，作出所有权转移的裁定，并以裁定公示或送达的时间为所有权取得的时点。需要强制交付的，由拍定人向法院提出强制执行申请，由执行法院强制交付。其三，论述了瑕疵担保请求权，即买受人的瑕疵担保请求权。瑕疵担保请求权分为物的瑕疵担保请求权和权利瑕疵担保请求权。笔者认为，因买受人取得拍卖标的物的所有权为原始取得，故不需赋予买受人瑕疵担保请求权。更多还原

【Abstract】 This thesis concerns mandatory executive auction. More and more attention is paid to the mandatory executive auction in the court executive procedures but legal regulations on mandatory executive auction are far behind theoretic researches in our country. I make research about the definition and features of mandatory executive auction, the implementation of auction, the solution of mortgage and property transference in real estate auction, legal obligations and so on in view of foreign legislation and my working experience, so that theoretic law circles will pay attention to this issue to instruct judicatory implementation and it is especially significant to the legislation of mandatory execution. There are four parts in this thesis.The first part gives a brief account of the definition and features of mandatory executive auction. First, it accounts its definition. Auction includes arbitrary auction and mandatory auction. Auction in mandatory executive procedures is different from common auction. It is a kind of mandatory auction, that is, the court sells the confiscated property of debtor to those who offers the highest in form of open biding to pay the executive debt when it is overdue, whereas common auction is a form of transaction of selling goods or property to the highest bidder in form of open bidding in auction law and business activities of the auction enterprises. Second, it concerns the features of mandatory executive auction. This thesis proposes three theories of mandatory executive auction features, that is, private law theory, public law theory and eclectic theory in view of relevant theories by scholars of foreign legislation and Taiwan. Private law theory considers mandatory executive auction as private law act, a kind of transaction. Public law considers it as public law act executed according to public law. Eclectic theory is the compromise between private law theory and public law theory and considers it embodied double features in nature, that is, on one hand, the mandatory punishment of public law and on the other hand, the transaction feature and results of private law. Because mandatory executive auction is the act based on national public rights, I prefer public theory.The second part gives a brief account of the procedures of mandatory <WP=45>executive auction. At present, there is a lack of relevant legal regulations on the implementation of mandatory executive auction in our country, so it is necessary to learn from foreign legislation for research so that there are regulations for the court to follow in the mandatory auction in executive procedures. The thesis proposes concrete procedures in mandatory auction based on foreign legal regulations and my working experience. First, it is about the preparatory procedures in mandatory executive auction. Before the court carries out mandatory auction, it should entrust evaluation organ to make an evaluation of auction bid, ensure the base price and bail, the date of auction, inform litigant to be present and issue auction announcement. Then it is concerns the implementation procedures of mandatory executive auction. It expounds the main part of the implementation of mandatory executive auction, how to end an auction in the implementation and the solution when there is no bidder. According to the legal regulations in our country, the auctions that the court mandatory executes are all entrust to enterprises, presided by auction personnel of the auction enterprises. It make a comparison between enterprises and the court as the main part of the implementation of mandatory executive auction and elaborates the viewpoint that it is better for the court to preside the auction. The definition of the top price of the auctioned property in the executive procedures concerns the degree of debt fulfillment of the cash debtor so it is necessary to carry out certain procedures before the auction ends. If nobody offers a bid, it can be re-auctioned or returns to debtor. The third part gives a brief account of the solution of the responsibilities for更多还原