CAJ | 학술논문

在同一债权上物之担保与人之保证并存时，我国立法中以“物权优于债权”理论为基础来解决物之担保与人之保证并存时担保责任的效力次序问题并无充分依据。我国物权法规定的“约定优先”附带了区分担保物是否由债务人提供的限制，并未完全尊重债权人的自由选择权。债务人自己提供物之担保的优先于人之担保而清偿债权会加重债权人的负担，背离了债权设定担保的意图与宗旨。在保证人承担一般保证责任情形下，债权人根据《物权法》第176条规定同时要求保证人承担保证责任和要求就物之担保实现债权，会遇到《担保法》规定的保证人先诉抗辩权的障碍，必须对第176条作进一步解释和规范，增加债权人同时要求保证人承担保证责任和就物之担保实现债权的前提条件。
재동일채권상물지담보여인지보증병존시，아국입법중이“물권우우채권”이론위기출래해결물지담보여인지보증병존시담보책임적효력차서문제병무충분의거。아국물권법규정적“약정우선”부대료구분담보물시부유채무인제공적한제，병미완전존중채권인적자유선택권。채무인자기제공물지담보적우선우인지담보이청상채권회가중채권인적부담，배리료채권설정담보적의도여종지。재보증인승담일반보증책임정형하，채권인근거《물권법》제176조규정동시요구보증인승담보증책임화요구취물지담보실현채권，회우도《담보법》규정적보증인선소항변권적장애，필수대제176조작진일보해석화규범，증가채권인동시요구보증인승담보증책임화취물지담보실현채권적전제조건。
When the same obligatory is secured by both guarantee and security interest , defi- ning efficiency order of guarantee duty according to real right that having precedence over obligatory right is not sufficient in theory. There is restriction of the security interest provided by the debtor or the charger in Agreement to have priority according to Real Property Law of China , so it does not re- spect completely credior＇ s option right . Guarantee duty of security interest provided by debtor hav- ing precedence over the charger would aggravate for the debtor and break the principal aim of setting up the guarantee. The secured party may assert his right towards both the guarantee and the charger at the same time according to Article 176 of the Real Property Law of China , but his option right will be resisted by the right of plea for preference claims＇ according to our Guarantee Law. It is nec- essary to explain for Article 176 of the Real Property Law of China and the Article should be made a supplement for the premise condition.