【摘要】：我國《公司法》經(jīng)歷了 2013年的修訂之后,廢除了普通公司注冊資本的最低限額要求,施行注冊資本認(rèn)繳登記制,關(guān)于股東的出資繳付數(shù)額、方式、時(shí)間均可由股東自行商定,并將其記載于公司章程之中。這更加符合現(xiàn)代市場經(jīng)濟(jì)下各投資種類的安排與需求,而股東的利益也得到了進(jìn)一步的滿足,與此同時(shí)也引發(fā)了理論界、實(shí)務(wù)界對于債權(quán)人保護(hù)問題的擔(dān)心。認(rèn)繳制下股東可以約定畸長的出資繳納期限,或者不約定出資繳納期限,因此當(dāng)公司無法清償債權(quán)人的到期債務(wù),也未被申請破產(chǎn),而股東的出資期限未到,債權(quán)人是否還能憑照《最高人民法院關(guān)于適用 中華人民共和國公司法若干問題的規(guī)定(三)》第十三條的規(guī)定,要求未到出資繳付期限的股東向其承擔(dān)補(bǔ)充賠償責(zé)任呢?對此,公司法及其相關(guān)的司法解釋并未予以釋明,學(xué)界對此也莫衷一是。本文便是在該問題的基礎(chǔ)上,對此規(guī)定進(jìn)行深入分析,進(jìn)而得出因出資繳付期限未到從而未出資的股東也需向債權(quán)人承擔(dān)補(bǔ)充賠償責(zé)任,并且這一結(jié)論成果是有其理論與現(xiàn)實(shí)支撐的。本文第一部分,首先闡釋補(bǔ)充賠償責(zé)任的界定、其中包括性質(zhì)、特征及其構(gòu)成要件。緊接著便是在現(xiàn)今注冊資本之認(rèn)繳登記制的背景下,探究該制度的理論依據(jù),通過梳理和分析現(xiàn)存的相關(guān)學(xué)說,融合法定債務(wù)理論與資本擔(dān)保理論之正確方向,總結(jié)出公司法的特有理論依據(jù),即股東的有限責(zé)任與公司責(zé)任財(cái)產(chǎn)理論,從而得出出資限期未到的股東須向債權(quán)人承擔(dān)補(bǔ)充賠償責(zé)任是有其理論上的支撐,并通過圍繞注冊資本制改革,進(jìn)一步得出強(qiáng)化未出資股東向債權(quán)人承擔(dān)補(bǔ)充賠償責(zé)任這一救濟(jì)途徑是有其現(xiàn)實(shí)依據(jù)的。第二部分則是依據(jù)未出資股東向債權(quán)人承擔(dān)責(zé)任制度的立法現(xiàn)狀,分析現(xiàn)存的相關(guān)問題,具體包括:《公司法司法解釋(三)》第13條第2款中“未履行或未全面履行出資義務(wù)”的解釋問題;提前繳付出資的股東可否主張期限利益的問題;“公司不能清償”的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)缺失問題;未出資股東對公司債權(quán)人承擔(dān)補(bǔ)充賠償責(zé)任制度的訴訟程序問題。第三部分則是為完善上述問題給出的相關(guān)建議。本文認(rèn)為“未履行或未全面履行”應(yīng)解釋涵蓋至出資繳付期限未到的股東;股東不可向債權(quán)人主張期限利益;“公司不能清償”之標(biāo)準(zhǔn)應(yīng)是公司必須經(jīng)過強(qiáng)制執(zhí)行程序之后確定。本文論題始于實(shí)踐中產(chǎn)生的理論困境與司法實(shí)踐困境,目的是希望通過研究分析,為該制度或者說該規(guī)定在認(rèn)繳制下找到合理的理論支撐,同時(shí)基于理論依據(jù)對于該規(guī)定本身存在的問題,給出一些相對合理的完善建議。
[Abstract]:After the revision of the Company Law in 2013, the minimum requirement of registered capital of ordinary companies was abolished, and the registered capital subscription registration system was carried out. And record it in the articles of association. This is more in line with the arrangement and demand of various types of investment under the modern market economy, and the interests of shareholders are further satisfied. At the same time, it also leads to the concern of the theoretical and practical circles about the protection of creditors. Under the subscription system, shareholders may agree on an unusually long time limit for the contribution of capital contributions, or may not agree on a time limit for the payment of capital contributions. Therefore, when the company is unable to pay off the debts due of the creditors and has not been filed for bankruptcy, the time limit for the shareholders' contribution is not up. Can the creditor still require the shareholders who have not reached the time limit to pay the capital contribution to bear the supplementary liability for compensation in accordance with the provisions of the Supreme people's Court concerning the application of certain issues of the Company Law of the people's Republic of China (3) > Article 13? To this, the company law and its related judicial explanation have not been explained, the academic circle also does not agree on this. This article is on the basis of this question, carries on the thorough analysis to this stipulation, then draws the conclusion that because the capital contribution payment deadline has not come, the shareholder who does not have the capital contribution also has to bear the supplementary compensation liability to the creditor, And this conclusion has its theoretical and practical support. The first part of this paper first explains the definition of supplementary liability, including the nature, characteristics and components. Then, under the background of the present registered capital subscription registration system, this paper probes into the theoretical basis of the system, combs and analyzes the existing relevant theories, and combines the legal debt theory and the capital guarantee theory in the right direction. Summing up the unique theoretical basis of the company law, that is, the limited liability of shareholders and the theory of corporate liability property, so that shareholders who do not have a time limit to contribute to bear the supplementary liability to creditors is theoretically supported. Through the reform of the registered capital system, it is concluded that there is a realistic basis to strengthen the relief way of the unfunded shareholders to bear the supplementary liability to the creditors. The second part is based on the current legislative situation of the liability system of unfunded shareholders to creditors, and analyzes the existing related problems. It includes: the explanation of "not performing or not fully performing the obligation of capital contribution" in the second paragraph of Article 13 of the interpretation of Company Law, the question of whether the shareholders who pay the capital contribution in advance can claim the interests of the time limit; The lack of the standard of "the company cannot be paid off" and the litigation procedure of the system of compensatory liability of the unfunded shareholders to the creditors of the company. The third part is to perfect the above question to give the related suggestion. This paper holds that "not performing or not fully performing" should be interpreted to cover shareholders who have not paid their capital contributions until the time limit, and shareholders may not claim the interests of the term from the creditors. The standard of "company insolvent" shall be that the company must be determined after the enforcement procedure. The purpose of this thesis is to find reasonable theoretical support for the system or regulation under the subscription system through research and analysis. At the same time, based on the theoretical basis for the existing problems of the provision itself, some relatively reasonable suggestions are given.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：遼寧大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D922.291.91

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 郭富青;;股東違反出資義務(wù)時(shí)的公司債權(quán)人求償路徑[J];財(cái)經(jīng)法學(xué);2016年03期

2 周s，

本文編號：2248998