公司债权人补充赔偿请求权的性质

发布时间：2018-03-10 04:34

本文选题：代位权　切入点：补充赔偿请求权　出处：《浙江大学》2017年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：一个公司的成立以资本的注入为前提条件,股东按照认缴的出资额足额缴纳出资,这些出资构成了公司的原始资本,是公司得以运行的物质基础和前提保障。即便如此,在我国股东未履行或者未全面履行出资义务的行为却广泛发生,这严重损害了公司相对方—公司债权人的利益。但是纵观目前学术界的研究现状,大部分的研究主要集中在当股东存在未履行或者未全面履行出资义务的行为时,其对公司以及其他按约履行出资义务的股东的责任,而其究竟应该对公司的债权人承担什么责任研究的却相对较少。考虑到在目前处在公司资本制度改革的大环境下,法律对股东如何缴纳注册资本、何时缴纳注册资本,不再予以严格的规定,验资程序也相应地废除,这势必会造成股东未不按期缴纳出资义务的行为更加常见,因此突出对公司债权人权利的保护很有必要。虽然也有一些学者就公司债权人的利益保护为切入点进行研究探求《公司法司法解释三》第13条第2款中公司债权人对未履行或者未全面履行出资义务的股东的补充赔偿请求权的性质,但是大部分是直接得出该请求权的性质属于代位权,然后再从代位权的要件的基础上对此加以分析。笔者另辟蹊径,通过一些法院相互矛盾的案例引出该条文在适用中出现的问题,然后分别从逻辑解释层面和文义解释层面上对关于该条请求权的性质的学说加以比较分析。本文由四个部分组成。第一部分,笔者从法院的几个矛盾判例出发,指出债权人在适用《公司法司法解释三》第13条第2款的相关规定追究未履行或者未全面履行出资义务的股东的补充赔偿责任存在的问题,并指出产生该问题的原因是理论上对公司债权人补充赔偿请求权性质的学说没有统一。第二部分,笔者从理论层面上关于公司债权人补充赔偿请求权性质的三个学说进行比较分析,得出代位权说能更加合理的解释公司债权人补充赔偿请求权性质的结论。第三部分,笔者从文义理解层面对关于公司债权人补充赔偿请求权性质的三个学说进行比较,得出代位权说更加契合《公司法司法解释三》关于公司债权人补充赔偿请求权性质的规定。第四部分,笔者在针对"不入库"规则的弊端进行分析之后,提出了回复传统代位权说的"入库"规则,并对完善"入库"规则提出了一些建议。
[Abstract]:The establishment of a company by capital injection as the prerequisite, the shareholders in accordance with the amount of the capital contributions subscribed for full payment of capital contributions, these contributions constitute the company's original capital, is the prerequisite and material base in the operation of the company. Even so, in our country the shareholders did not perform or not fully fulfill the obligation of capital contribution behavior is widespread serious damage to the company, the party and the interests of creditors. But look at the status of academe at present, most of the studies focused on when the shareholder fails to fulfill or fails to fully fulfill the obligation of capital contribution is performed, the responsibility of the company and other shareholders to perform the obligation of capital contribution, and it should bear what responsibility of the creditors of the company is relatively small. Considering the reform of the system of company is currently in the capital of the environment law for shareholders to pay registration When capital, pay the registered capital, no longer be strict rules of verification procedures accordingly abolished, it is bound to cause the shareholders do not pay the capital contribution obligation behavior is more common, so it is necessary to focus on protecting the company creditor's rights. Although there are some scholars on the protection of the interests of the creditors of the company as a starting point for research to explore the "company law judicial interpretation three > thirteenth paragraph second of the creditors of the company fails to perform or supplement the nature of the compensation is not fully fulfill the obligation of capital contribution of the shareholders the right to request, but most are the properties obtained directly the request right belongs to the right of subrogation, and then from the basic elements of the subrogation rights on this the author analyzes. Another way, through a number of conflicting court case leads to the provisions in the application of the problems, and then from the logical level and the level of literal interpretation On the nature of claim of the theory of comparative analysis. This paper consists of four parts. The first part, the author from the court case of several contradictions, pointed out that the creditors in the application of the "company law judicial interpretation of the relevant provisions of the second paragraph of article three of the investigation did not fulfill or > thirteenth problems not fully fulfill the obligation of capital contribution of shareholders the responsibility of compensation, and pointed out that the reason is the theory of corporate creditors claim compensation nature theory there is no uniform. The second part, the author analyzed theoretically the three theories about the nature of the right to request compensation of creditors of the company, said that the right of subrogation can more reasonable interpretation of creditors of the company the nature of the right to request compensation conclusion. The third part, the author from the meaning of understanding in the face of three theories about the creditors of the company compensation request right Compared to that of right of subrogation that agrees with the judicial interpretation of the company law > < three of the creditors of the company the right to request compensation for supplementary provisions of the nature. The fourth part, the author analyzes the shortcomings in the following "instockroom" rules, proposed a return to a traditional subrogation "storage" rules, and puts forward some suggestions for improvement "storage" rules.

【学位授予单位】：浙江大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D922.291.91

【参考文献】