【作者】 杨峰；

【导师】 李潇；

【作者基本信息】 广西师范大学 ， 法学， 2023， 硕士

【摘要】 保证金质押是以特定账户内资金出质的担保方式。近年来,随着个人消费者和小微企业获得信贷的需求越来越大,保证金质押以其设立方式便利、担保标的物价值较为稳定以及担保功能实现成本低的特点,获得银行和融资者的青睐。但是我国保证金质押的法律规定不完善,各法院对保证金质押的生效要件、效力、公示要件等裁判标准存在不一致,也导致双方当事人的担保合意无法得到法院认可。虽然《中华人民共和国民法典》(以下简称《民法典》)第三百八十八条规定担保合同包括“其他具有担保功能的合同”,在一定程度上缓和了“物权法定原则”,为当事人设立意定担保物权提供法律基础,《最高人民法院关于适用<中华人民共和国民法典>有关担保制度的解释》(以下简称《民法典担保制度解释》)在非典型担保部分第七十条对保证金质押出质人、保证金质押设立的目的、保证金质押的生效要件以及保证金质押的浮动性作出规定。但是,保证金质押作为非典型担保在权利设立、物权公示、担保功能实现等问题上如何与典型担保衔接或者“一体化”,如何充分发挥保证金质押的优势等问题有待进一步解释和确认。除引言和结语外,全文共分为四个部分。第一部分,保证金质押的概述。首先,介绍保证金质押的定义及特征,明确本文所研究的保证金质押的定义是以特定银行账户中的资金担保债权人债权实现的担保方式。在此基础上结合保证金质押的三个特点展开分析,即以属于种类物的特定金钱为出质物,以银行账户作为转移占有的媒介,以直接扣划保证金作为担保功能的实现方式。其次,将保证金质押与账户质押、应收账款质押、存单质押相似概念进行辨析,进一步明确保证金质押的定义和特点。最后,从便于企业获得信贷进而有利于优化营商环境、有利于缓释银行借贷风险、有利于活跃市场经济三个方面分析保证金质押的意义。第二部分,探讨当下保证金质押的基础性问题,并提出本文的观点。首先简要介绍保证金质押法律性质的各种学说观点,并对各种学说观点进行评析,进而提出本文的观点即保证金质押属于非典型担保。其次,简要介绍保证金质押的生效要件包括债权人与债务人或第三人达成书面保证金质押合意、保证金须特定化、保证金须由债权人实际控制三个方面。进而明确以特定化的货币为出质物转移占有后不发生所有权转移、约定直接扣划保证金的担保功能实现方式不构成流质条款这两个特殊性问题。最后,介绍当下我国保证金质押的公示方式和保证金质押的法律效力为下文重构保证金质押的公示制度和探索保证金质押担保功能实现奠定基础。第三部分,我国保证金质押的法律现状及存在的问题。首先,通过规范分析法从《民法典》对非典型担保的规定和关于保证金质押的司法解释两个方面梳理我国保证金质押的立法现状。其次,通过案例分析法分析我国司法实践中法院对保证金质押审判标准不一致的现象。最后,针对立法和司法现状分析出保证金质押存在的法律问题,主要存在:一是法律未规定的保证金质押类型的效力不明确;二是保证金质押生效要件的规定不够明确;三是保证金质押公示方式的对世性效力弱;四是保证金被另案执行导致债权人无法优先受偿;五是破产债权人恶意破坏保证金的特定化阻碍出质人取回权的行使五个方面的问题。第四部分,针对保证金质押立法和司法中存在的法律问题提出针对性的建议。一是扩大保证金质押的范围,针对当下分散在各司法解释中对个别保证金质押类型排他性效力的规定,不能局限于司法解释的规定,应将满足生效要件的类型都纳入保证金质押范围内,赋予相应的优先受偿效力和排他效力;二是细化保证金质押生效要件的规定,在具有书面担保合意的基础上需要满足保证金的特定化和债权人对保证金的实际控制,保证金质押才有效设立;三是重构保证金质押的公示制度,有效设立的保证金质押需要在中国人民银行登记后方具有担保物权的效力,通过登记的方式增强保证金质押对世公示效力,并作为保证金质押的合同之债向担保物权转化的关键;四是统一司法机关扣划保证金的标准,避免第三人通过强制执行破坏成立在先并经过登记的保证金质押;五是增设出质人有权取回保证金的具体规定,保护出质人对保证金的排他性取回权。更多还原

【Abstract】 Deposit pledge is a form of security in which funds in a specific account are pledged.In recent years,with the increasing demand for individual consumers and small and medium-sized enterprises to obtain credit,deposit pledge has gained the favor of banks and financiers for its convenient establishment,stability of the value of the subject matter of the security and low cost of realizing the security function.However,the legal provisions on deposit pledge in China are not perfect,and there are inconsistencies in the adjudication standards of various court decisions on the elements of validity,effectiveness and publicity of deposit pledge,which also lead to the fact that the security consents of both parties cannot be recognized by the court.Although Article 388 of the Civil Code of the People’s Republic of China(hereinafter referred to as the "Civil Code")stipulates that security contracts include "other contracts with security functions",which to a certain extent alleviates the "legal principle of property rights" and provides a legal basis for the parties to establish an intentional security right,the legal basis for the parties to establish an intentional security right is not limited to the legal basis.Article 70 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People’s Court on the Application of the Civil Code of the People’s Republic of China Concerning the Security System(hereinafter referred to as the "Interpretation of the Security System of the Civil Code")provides for deposit pledge,the purpose of the establishment of deposit pledge,the elements of the validity of deposit pledge and the floating nature of deposit pledge in Article 70 of the section on atypical security.However,how deposit pledge,as an atypical security,can be connected or "integrated" with the typical security in terms of the establishment of rights,publicity of property rights and realization of security functions,and how to give full play to the advantages of deposit pledge,etc.are to be further explained and confirmed.Except for the introduction and conclusion,the whole text is divided into four parts.In the first part,the overview of deposit pledge.Firstly,the definition and characteristics of deposit pledge are introduced to clarify that the definition of deposit pledge studied in this paper is a security method to secure the realization of creditors’ claims with the deposit in a specific bank account.On this basis,the three characteristics of deposit pledge are combined,namely,the pledge of specific money belonging to the kind,the use of bank account as the medium of transferring possession,and the direct deduction of the deposit as the realization of the security function.Secondly,the definition and characteristics of deposit pledge are further clarified by identifying the similar concepts of deposit pledge with account pledge,accounts receivable pledge and certificate of deposit pledge.Finally,the significance of deposit pledge is analyzed from three aspects:facilitating enterprises’ access to credit,optimizing business environment,mitigating bank lending risks,and activating market economy.In the second part,introduce the basic issues of the controversial deposit pledge and present the viewpoint of this paper.Firstly,it briefly introduces various doctrinal views on the legal nature of deposit pledge,and then reviews the various doctrinal views and presents the viewpoint of this paper that deposit pledge is an atypical security.Secondly,it briefly introduces the requirements for the validity of a deposit pledge,including the written agreement of the creditor and the debtor or a third party to pledge the deposit,the specificity of deposit pledge,and the actual control of the creditor over the deposit.Then,we clarify two special issues,namely,the transfer of ownership does not occur after the transfer of possession with the specified currency as the pledge,and the agreement of direct deduction of the security function does not constitute a flow-through clause.Finally,we introduce the main publicity methods and the priority and exclusivity effects of deposit pledge in China to lay the foundation for the following reconstruction of the publicity system of deposit pledge and the exploration of the realization of the security function of deposit pledge.In the third part,we analyze the legislative and judicial status of deposit pledge in China.Firstly,we analyze the current status of the legislation on deposit pledge in China from the provisions of the Civil Code on atypical security and the judicial interpretation on deposit pledge by means of legal analysis.Secondly,we analyze the inconsistency of the courts’ judgment on deposit pledge in China’s judicial practice by means of case studies.Finally,the legal problems of deposit pledge are analyzed in view of the current legislative and judicial situation,and there are mainly five aspects: the unclear validity of the types of deposit pledge not provided for by law;the legislation on deposit pledge,the lack of clarity in the provisions of the elements for the validity of deposit pledge;the deposit pledge public notice and public notice of the weak effect on the world;the failure of creditors to receive priority payment due to the enforcement of the deposit in another case;and the malicious destruction of the specificity of the deposit by bankrupt creditors to prevent the exercise of the pledge’s right to retrieve.In the fourth part,targeted suggestions are made to address the problems existing in the legislation and justice of deposit pledge.The first is to expand the scope of the deposit pledge,in view of the provisions of the exclusive effect of the individual types of deposit pledge scattered in various judicial interpretations,this paper believes that the types that meet the elements of the validity should be included in the scope of the deposit pledge.The second is to refine the provisions of the elements of the validity of the deposit pledge,on the basis of the security agreement,it is necessary to meet the specificity of the deposit and the actual control of the creditor over the deposit before the deposit pledge is effectively established.The third is to reconstruct the publicity system of the deposit pledge,and the effectively established deposit pledge needs to be registered with the People’s Bank of China before it has the effect of the security right,and enhance the publicity effect of the deposit pledge to the world through registration,and serve as the key to the transformation of the debt of the deposit pledge contract which is atypical security to the security right.The fourth is to unify the standards of withholding of deposits by judicial authorities to avoid third parties from destroying the established and registered deposit pledge through enforcement.The fifth is to add a specific provision that the pledge has the right to retrieve the deposit to ensure the pledge’s exclusive right to retrieve the deposit.更多还原