【线上云德】疫情期间律师说（一百七十四）┃《民法典》中有关担保物权的规定（二）

《民法典》颁布后，在担保规定方面将散见于各个法律规范中的担保物权及保证的规定进行了统一化规定，特别是将保证担保列为典型合同（也称“有名合同”），为法律的统一适用奠定了基础。在担保物权中清理了《担保法》、《担保法》司法解释、《物权法》相互冲突的条文，并确立了一些非典型担保合同的担保功能，对九民纪要中提到了无效法律行为转换进行明确，统一了法律理解与法律适用。对保证方式约定不明以及如何认定保证方式进行了与以往法律不同的规定。增加了担保人追偿权与代位权的规定，为权利的行使确定了方向。这些规定都值得我们认真学习与理解，以便正确适用法律，指导我们的司法实践。

After the promulgation of the "Civil Code", the guarantee provisions have unified provisions on the security property rights and guarantees scattered in various laws and regulations, especially the guarantee guarantee is listed as a typical contract (also called a "famous contract"). Laid a foundation for the uniform application of the law. The conflicting provisions of the "Guarantee Law", "Guarantee Law" judicial interpretation, and "Property Law" have been cleaned up in the security real right, and the guarantee function of some atypical guarantee contracts has been established. In the Jiumin Minutes, the conversion of invalid legal acts is mentioned Make clear, unify legal understanding and law application. It is different from the previous laws on the unclear agreement of the guarantee method and how to determine the guarantee method. The guarantor's right of recourse and subrogation have been added to determine the direction for the exercise of rights. These regulations are worthy of our serious study and understanding in order to correctly apply the law and guide our judicial practice.

2、明确了动产抵押权的登记对抗主义的内涵

《物权法》中关于动产抵押权确定了动产抵押权自合同生效时设立，不登记不得对抗第三人，改变了以前《担保法》规定的登记生效主义。但是《物权法》并没有明确该第三人是具有物权关系的第三人，还是包括该抵押人的普通债权人。例如，在破产程序中，未登记的动产抵押权人能否对抗破产企业的普通债权人？《物权法》第189条规定了浮动抵押权未登记的不得对抗已经支付价款并取得抵押财产的买受人，即取得物权的第三人。《物权法》司法解释一第6条规定：“转让人转移船舶、航空器和机动车等所有权，受让人已经支付对价并取得占有，虽未经登记，但转让人的债权人主张其为物权法第24条所称的“善意第三人”的，不予支持，法律另有规定的除。”因此，从《物权法》到司法解释均将抵押人的普通债权人排除在外，不能对抗仅仅是取得物权（包括担保物权）的善意第三人。《民法典》更加明确了这一条，《民法典》第403条规定：“以动产抵押的，抵押权自抵押合同生效时设立；未经登记，不得对抗善意第三人。”第404条规定：“以动产抵押的，不得对抗正常经营活动中已经支付合理价款并取得抵押财产的买受人。”明确将普通债权人排除在外，解决了实务中的争议。

2. Clarify the connotation of the registration antagonism of chattel mortgage

The "Property Law" on the mortgage of movables establishes that the mortgage of movables shall be established when the contract becomes effective, and it shall not be against a third party without registration, which has changed the registration effective doctrine stipulated in the previous "Security Law". However, the "Property Law" does not clarify whether the third party is a third party with a property relationship or an ordinary creditor including the mortgagor. For example, in the bankruptcy proceedings, can the unregistered mortgagee of movable property fight against the ordinary creditors of the bankrupt enterprise? Article 189 of the "Property Law" stipulates that the unregistered floating mortgage shall not be against the buyer who has already paid the price and obtained the mortgaged property, that is, the third person who has obtained the property right. Article 6 of the Judicial Interpretation 1 of the Property Law stipulates: “The transferor transfers the ownership of ships, aircraft, motor vehicles, etc., and the transferee has paid the consideration and obtained possession. Although it has not been registered, the creditors of the transferor claim that it is Article 24 of the Property Law. The “third party in good faith” mentioned in the article shall not be supported, except as otherwise provided by the law.” Therefore, from the "Property Law" to the judicial interpretation, ordinary creditors of the mortgagor shall be excluded. A bona fide third party (including security rights). The "Civil Code" clarifies this article. Article 403 of the "Civil Code" stipulates: "If a movable property is mortgaged, the mortgage shall be established when the mortgage contract becomes effective; it shall not be against bona fide third parties without registration." Article 404 provides "The mortgage of movable property shall not be against the buyer who has paid a reasonable price and obtained the mortgaged property in normal business activities." It clearly excluded ordinary creditors and resolved the disputes in practice.

2、确定了抵押物在抵押期间可以转让，除非另有约定除外。

《民法典》颁布之前，《物权法》采取的是禁止抵押人转让抵押财产的立场。依据该法第191条的规定，抵押期间，抵押人未经抵押权人同意，不得转让抵押财产;经抵押权人的同意后，抵押人才能转让抵押财产。如果抵押人不能得到抵押权人的同意，又想要转让抵押财产，那么只有受让人行使涤除权才能购买抵押物。《物权法》的规定实际上架空了抵押权的追及效力，既然不得转让，也谈不上追及效力的问题，违反了抵押权的一般属性。另外，禁止抵押物的流转也限制了抵押人对抵押物的所有权，因为所有权中最有效的权能是处分权。尤其是在抵押物的价值高于担保的债权数额时，如果禁止抵押物转让，不仅会影响抵押物的价值功能，也会损害其他债权人或抵押权人的利益。如果允许抵押物进行转让，对抵押权人的利益完全可以依靠抵押权的追及效力来实现。即不管抵押物辗转于何人之手，均不影响物上设立的抵押权，抵押权人均可以要求受让人行使涤除权，也可以要求拍卖抵押物并就拍卖价款优先受偿。如果抵押权人认为转让有可能损害其利益，可以与抵押人约定不得转让，并将该事项记载于不动产登记簿，还能产生对办理抵押财产转移登记的登记机构以及抵押财产受让人的约束力。

因此，《民法典》第406条将此种情况规定为:“抵押期间，抵押人可以转让抵押财产。当事人另有约定的，按照其约定。抵押财产转让的，抵押权不受影响。抵押人转让抵押财产的，应当及时通知抵押权人。抵押权人能够证明抵押财产转让可能损害抵押权的，可以请求抵押人将转让所得的价款向抵押权人提前清偿债务或者提存。转让的价款超过债权数额的部分归抵押人所有，不足部分由债务人清偿。”

2. It is confirmed that the mortgaged property can be transferred during the mortgage period, unless otherwise agreed.

Before the "Civil Code" was promulgated, the "Property Law" adopted the position of prohibiting the mortgagor from transferring the mortgaged property. According to the provisions of Article 191 of the law, during the mortgage period, the mortgagor shall not transfer the mortgaged property without the consent of the mortgagee; the mortgagee can only transfer the mortgaged property with the consent of the mortgagee. If the mortgagor cannot obtain the consent of the mortgagee and wants to transfer the mortgaged property, then only the transferee can purchase the mortgaged property by exercising the right of exclusion. The provisions of the "Property Law" actually emptied the effect of the mortgage right. Since it is not transferable, there is no question of the effect of the mortgage, which violates the general nature of the mortgage right. In addition, the prohibition on the circulation of the mortgaged property also limits the mortgagor's ownership of the mortgaged property, because the most effective power of ownership is the right of disposal. Especially when the value of the mortgaged property is higher than the amount of the secured creditor's rights, if the transfer of the mortgaged property is prohibited, it will not only affect the value function of the mortgaged property, but also damage the interests of other creditors or mortgagee. If the mortgage is allowed to be transferred, the interests of the mortgagee can be realized by relying on the effect of the mortgage. That is, no matter who the mortgage is transferred to, it will not affect the mortgage rights established on the property. The mortgagee can request the transferee to exercise the right of erasure, or request the auction of the mortgage and receive priority payment for the auction price. If the mortgagee believes that the transfer may harm its interests, it can agree with the mortgagor not to transfer and record the matter in the real estate register, which can also create constraints on the registration agency that handles the mortgage transfer registration and the transferee of the mortgaged property force.

Therefore, Article 406 of the Civil Code stipulates this situation as: "During the mortgage period, the mortgagor may transfer the mortgaged property. If the parties agree otherwise, in accordance with their agreement. If the mortgaged property is transferred, the mortgage right will not be affected. The mortgagee If the mortgaged property is transferred, the mortgagee shall be notified in time. If the mortgagee can prove that the transfer of the mortgaged property may damage the mortgage right, it may request the mortgagor to repay the debt or deposit the proceeds from the transfer to the mortgagee in advance. The value of the transfer exceeds the creditor’s rights. The part of the amount belongs to the mortgagor, and the shortfall shall be paid by the debtor."