摘要： 《民法典》及其司法解释强化了对保证债权行使的限制,据此,保证人可免于承担主债务人破产后的利息。本文认为,以利息为例的破产风险是否由保证人承担属于保证合同的自治范畴,主债务人破产并非减免保证责任的法定或意定事由,司法解释应当在《民法典》的语意内作业,并还原担保制度风险兜底的本来意旨。破产受理实则构成先诉抗辩权的阻却事由和保证债务加速到期的触发事由,债权人的同时求偿且互不扣减规则将彻底阻断主债务与保证债务之间的涉他效力,即破产程序在维持保证债务同一性的基础之上,应淡化处理其内部位阶关系。简单地将债务人破产视为从属性的例外是对破产制度的歧视,破产程序的启动其实是债务人丧失清偿能力的表见因素,破产法对实体权利的规范限度均由此展开。相应地,保证债权的行使及其限制之命题在破产法语境下有重新阐释的必要。

关键词: 保证债权, 从属性, 停止计息, 先诉抗辩权, 破产法规范限度原则

Abstract: The Civil Code and its judicial interpretations have strengthened the restrictions on guarantee by releasing guarantor from postpetition interest in principle's bankruptcy procedure.However, whether insolvency risk, including its interest, constitutes guarantor's liability shall depend on the interpretation of contract, and the mere fact that principle bankrupts shall not diminish such liability legally or intentionally.Judicial interpretations shall take effect within the framework of the Civil Code, and pay due respect to the value of splitting risk of guaranty.Actually, the commencement of bankruptcy procedure will deter guarantor's privilege of order, as well as accelerate the expiration of guarantor's liability.Creditors are thus entitled to reimbursement both from principle and guarantor with two parallel rights not affected by each other, which thoroughly cuts off any interaction in joint and several liability.In this way, while bankruptcy procedure maintains the homogeneity of secondary liability, it denies the subordinate nature of guaranty.Simply treating bankruptcy as exceptional interference in subordination rules will create discrimination.Conversely, bankruptcy is the signal of debtor's lacking of capacity, so the limitation of bankruptcy rules adjusting legal rights shall all be based on this standpoint.Therefore, the topic of exertion and restriction of guaranty shall be reexamined in the context of bankruptcy.

Key words: Guaranty, Subordination, Postpetition Interest, Privilege of Order, Limitative Principle of Bankruptcy Rules