司法实践中债务加入与保证的区分标准研究  

Research on the Criteria for Differentiating Debt Assumption from Guarantee

作　　者：彭玲 魏哲 PENG Ling;WEI Zhe(School of Law,East China University of Political Science and Law,Shanghai 200042,China)

机构地区：[1]华东政法大学法律学院,上海200042

出　　处：《海南开放大学学报》2024年第2期130-138,共9页Journal of Hainan Open University

摘　　要：作为一种广泛采取的增信措施,债务加入在《民法典》第五百五十二条首次得到明确规定,但债务加入和保证都具有保障债权人实现债权的担保功能,在实践中很难区分,并且缺乏统一的区分认定标准,导致在实践中存在许多分歧。因此,在区分债务加入和保证时,首先需要明确当事人的意思表示。如果当事人的意思表示不明确,则需要综合考虑是否存在履行顺位、是否存在不承担责任的期待等因素对当事人的意思表示进行解释。如果解释仍不明确,则应按照存疑推定为保证的规则进行处理。As a widely adopted credit enhancement measure,joint debt is explicitly stipulated for the first time in Article 552 of the Civil Code.However,both joint debt and guarantees serve the function of securing creditors'rights,thus making it difficult to distinguish them in practice,and there is a lack of uniform standards for differentiation,which leads to numerous disagreements in practice.Therefore,when distinguishing between joint debt and guarantees,it is necessary to first clarify the involved parties'intentions.If the intentions are unclear,it is necessary to interpret them by considering factors such as the order of performance and the expectation of not bearing responsibility.If the interpretation remains unclear,it should be handled according to the rule of presumption in favor of guarantees.

关 键 词：债务加入 保证 区分标准 意思表示解释 

分 类 号：D923.3[政治法律—民商法学]