民法上併付拍賣制度之再檢討

蓋抵押權之本質乃就抵押物之賣得價金得受清償之權，故抵押權作為擔保債權清償之手段，係為抵押權人將來在實行抵押權時，能有抵押物存在來擔保債權將來得以滿足即為已足。故抵押權之全部，擔保債權的每一部分，而抵押物之每一部分，因而對其所擔保之物權具有從屬性；是以，因抵押權係支配標的物交換價值之價值權，具有使得抵押權能發揮媒介投資手段之社會作用。因此，實體法規定是否合理周全，關係到抵押權制度是否合於債權債務雙方之各種需求，進而促進經濟社會之活絡發展；而程式法規是否有效迅速，除有利於債權人取償之外，自反面而言，更能扼止運用程式漏洞、惡意不履行債務之情形，發揮促進債權債務良性關係之效果。由於在近年來民法物權篇在2007年、2009年，陸續進行修法，使得民法第862條、第866條、第877條均有所修正，該等修正是否解決了實務上之併付拍賣或除權拍賣之判斷標準，或者解決執行困難之問題？而併付拍賣規定中之「影響拍賣價格」至於需要除權之程度標準又應如何認定？修法之後是否在抵押權人、抵押人、租賃或用益物權人這三者間之利益，取得公益上之平衡等等，均仍不無疑問，以上問題均為本文所欲研究之核心主題。本文就抵押權本身之概念、不同標的物所產生的各式併付拍賣問題、併付拍賣之目的、新舊法修法後之異同，以及對於如何正確適用法律等問題，一併在本文中詳細討論之。

關鍵字

併付拍賣；民法第866條；民法第877條；用益物權

並列摘要

The essence of the mortgage is the right to have the mortgaged property pay off the debts. Therefore, the Property rights of mortgage, as a means of guaranteeing the creditors rights get protected, that if the mortgagee can’t pay off the debts in the future, the the properties could be collateral to secure the creditor’s rights. Therefore, the entire property rights of mortgage property, should been seen as the mean secure creditor’s right, therefore that should be included to subordination of mortgage property. Therefore, due to the property rights of mortgage, it the right to make sure all the mortgages could play the role of warranty for debts in the society. In recent years, the chapter of Property Rights has been amended in Taiwan Civil Law successively in 2007 and 2009. Especially for the amendments to Articles 862, 866, and 877 of the Civil Law. Do these amendments solve the loopholes in the law of foreclosure? And solve the problems of judgment criteria for ex-rights auction in legal practice? And how the standard of "influencing the foreclosure price" in the foreclosure regulations should be determined to the extent that it needs to be ex-rights? After the law was amended, whether the interests of the mortgagee, mortgagor, lease and third party of usufructuary rights can be balanced in public welfare, etc., there is still have some doubts. The above questions are the core themes of this article. This article discusses the concept of the property rights of mortgage itself. The various types of concurrent auction issues arising from different subject matters, the purpose of Accessory Foreclosure Sale, the similarities and differences between the laws before and after the amendment, and the properly application of the laws are all discussed in this article.