法定代表人越权担保中的内部责任配置方式  

Internal Responsibility Allocation in Unauthorized Guarantee of Corporate Legal Representative

作　　者：赖虹宇[1] 吴越[1] LAI Hongyu, WU Yue(Law School, Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, Chengdu 611130, Chin)

机构地区：[1]西南财经大学法学院,成都611130

出　　处：《四川理工学院学报（社会科学版）》2018年第1期33-47,共15页Journal of Sichuan University of Science & Engineering(Social Sciences Edition)

基　　金：国家社科基金项目(15BFX099)

摘　　要：长期以来,公司法定代表人越权担保问题是我国公司法制运行过程中的重大争议问题,其中主要围绕越权担保合同的效力与越权担保责任的承担展开。通常情况下,合同的效力认定影响和决定了责任承担的方式。但经过对司法裁判案例的梳理发现,无论越权担保合同是否被认定为有效,司法裁判都倾向于责令公司为法定代表人的越权行为承担相应责任。根据最高人民法院在《最高人民法院公告》2015年第2期的一则公报案例与2017年《民法总则》第61条的立法,相继确认了法定代表人越权担保效力认定的善意有效规则,与之相关的责任承担规则也发生变化:"内外有别"法理之下,规范设计重在确认对外部第三人的效力,其规范目的在于强化对债权人利益的保护,从而建构起法定代表人的间接担责模式。在公司原则对外承担担保责任的前提下,法定代表人是否承担对公司终局性的内部责任规则却仍然付之阙如。分析表明,法定代表人终局责任承担的规则设计与法定代表人制度的设计息息相关,但我国采行的唯一代表制则阻滞了法定代表人内部担责的实现,内外有别法理也并未回答法定代表人内部责任的承担与配置方式问题。为通过制度设计使得越权担保的法定代表人承担终局性的内部责任,有两种备选方案。一是,借鉴我国台湾地区公司法上的相关设计,专门设置"法定代表人内部担责条款";二是,借鉴成立中公司的归责原则,设置"法定代表人内部担责外部化"规则,构建组织责任加身份责任的归责模式,通过立法使法定代表人在对外担保中与公司一起承担连带的担保责任。前者受困于我国现行公司法系统改造的困难性,以及公司两权分离不彻底背景下的公司法制运行系统环境,无法妥善地达到制度改善的目的。后者,则不仅可以将对公司越权担保行为的规制提前,极大地For a long time, the issue of unauthorized guarantee of corporate legal representative is a major issue in the process of the operation of corporate legal system in China. The main issues involve the validity of the unauthorized guarantee contract and the undertaking of unauthorized guarantee responsibility. Usually, the validity of the contract determines the way in which the responsibility is assumed and influenced. However, after a review of the judicial adjudication cases, it is found that judicial adjudication tends to order a company to take the corresponding responsibility for the unauthorized guarantee of the legal representative, regardless of whether the guarantee contract is found to be valid or not. According to the case in the Supreme People＇s Court Notice issued by Supreme People＇s Court in 2015, and the latest legislation of General Provisions of the Civil Law of the People ＇s Republic of China, how to recognize the validity of the unauthorized guarantee of corporate legal representative is confirmed and the related rules of accountability are also changed. This shows that, based on the jurisprudence of ＂internal and external differences＂, the normative design focuses on confirming the effectiveness of external third parties, and its norms are intended to strengthen the protection of creditors to establish an indirect responsibility model for legal representatives. However, under the precondition that a company undertakes the responsibility of guarantee to the outside parties, the rules of whether the legal representative assumes the internal responsibility of the company is still lack. The analysis shows that the ultimate responsibility of the legal representative is closely related to the design of the legal representative system. However, the current ＂single representative system＂ of China hinders the realization of the legal responsibility of the legal representative, and the jurisprudence of the internal and external does not answer the question of how to allocate the internal re

关 键 词：法定代表人 越权担保 “内外有别”法理 内部担责外部化 公司治理 

分 类 号：D913.991[政治法律—民商法学]