経営者の保証責任からの解放

保証は身近な契約です。決して迷惑はかけないと言われれば断りにくい（情誼性）、しかし将来の負担は契約時にはわからない（未必性）ことからトラブルを生じます。主債務者は返済不能に追いやられても、頼んだ保証人に迷惑がかかると考え、破産や再生手続に踏み切れないことも多いものです。

日本の自殺者は年間３万人前後といわれ、そのうち有職者で自営業者や家族従事者は３千人弱を占めています。

フランスでは、保証人の財産や収入に対して明白に比例性を欠いた場合には契約を無効とする比例原則があります。また、アメリカでは際限のない責任追及ではなく、担保設定した資産をもって責任の追及は終焉するのが原則です。

考えてみれば無限定な追求は貸手側の融資の判断ミスとも評価できることです。しかし、日本では、事業資金の借入に当たり経営者個人の保証を取り付けることが当たり前の慣行とされてきました。このことは、事業の廃止時期の判断を遅らせ、また再チャレンジを阻害する結果をもたらしています。

今、民法債権法の分野の改正が急ピッチで進められています。本年７月までには要綱仮案がとりまとめられる予定です。貸金等債務について経営者以外の第三者保証を禁止することは意見の一致を見ていますが、経営者の範囲をどのように定めるか、自発的な保証について例外を認めるかが残された検討課題です。

昨年、日本商工会議所と全国銀行協会が事務局となった有識者の研究会が、「経営者保証に関するガイドライン」をとりまとめ、今年２月１日から適用開始となりました。法的な拘束力はないのですが、金融庁もこのガイドラインを踏まえた監督指針案を公表しています。

ガイドラインは、経営者の個人保証がセットで考えられとする一体性を切断し思い切った事業展開や早期の再生を可能にすると期待されています（詳しくは金融庁ＨＰへ）。　　　その概要は、①法人と経営者個人が明確に分離されている場合などに経営者の個人保証を求めない、つまり、商品、売掛金等の担保等の代替的な融資条件を検討する。②保証債務の履行時に返済しきれない債務残額は原則として免除する。③早期に事業再生や廃業を決断した際に一定の生活費（従来の自由財産の拡張に加え年金などに応じて100～360万円）を残すことや華美でない自宅に住み続けられること等も検討する、とあり、今後の運用が注目されます。

〈中部経済新聞　「中経論壇」平成26年4月22日掲載　池田桂子　〉

 

Guarantee of Management Freedom from Responsibility

The guarantee contract is a familiar form of a legal contract. It is difficult to say when a person, either a family member or close friend may request for some help and that help, is with a guarantee contract (that stems from either affection or kindness). However, this may become a burden in the future and may cause some rather unforeseen difficulties because the guarantor does not know at the time they sign a guarantee contract (due to the uncertainty of repayment). There is then the possibility which should to be considered, and that consideration might be one relegated to non-repayment. That non-repayment is then applied to the guarantor who then becomes the main debtor and then could not decide as to taking rehabilitation proceedings and bankruptcy.

Suicides in Japan is said to be around 30,000 people a year. Family, full or part time workers and the self-employed accounted for a little less than 3,000 of them as persons having a job, or some form of income.

In France, there is a principle of proportionality to invalidate the contract if it is devoid of proportionality explicitly to income and property of the guarantor. In the United States, there is the principle, not to continue the blame endlessly; the pursuit of responsibility is to end with the assets as collateral.

When we change the view point, it is that pursuit which can be determined as being unqualified and can be revaluated as a misjudgment of the loan, and or the lender. However, in Japan, it is possible to install a guarantee on individual managers who borrow against business funds and this has been a practice which has been taken for granted. That then brings the result of a disturbing re-challenge, and also delays the decision of discontinuation of business.

Now, there is a movement of amendments in the field of “Civil Law of Obligations” which is underway at a rapid pace. I will outline a provisional draft when it has been compiled by the end of July of this year. In essence; prohibiting the third party guarantee of management other than for loans as debt and is looking at a consensus of those amendments, but what remains is how to delineate the scope of management. It is now a question of deciding whether to grant a spontaneous exception warranty which is now on the agenda.

Last year, a study group of experts, comprising of the Japanese Bankers Association and the Japan Chamber of Commerce and Industry compiled the “Guidelines for Management Guarantee”, and it was with the initial application from February 1, 2014 this year. Is not legally binding, but the Financial Services Agency has also published a draft oversight in light of these guidelines.

Guidelines, (please refer to the Financial Services Agency HP for more information), are expected to enable the payback of the early business development and drastically cutting its integrity.

That is ①Now, the debt of a Company should be considered in a set as a personal guarantee of management.　However, do not ask for my personal guarantee as management. For example, when that of an individual who may be management and that of corporations are clearly separated, that is, the summary is to consider the loan terms alternative obligations or products, such as accounts receivable. ②When a debt balance cannot be repaid on the time of fulfillment, the guarantee obligation is exempt in principle. ③ In the case of personal bankruptcy a guarantor may be allowed to continue living at his or her home which  is not considered unreasonable and to keep from 1000000-3600000 yen depending on the individuals pension, in addition to the extension of the free assets, as well as the cost of living should also be considered. So that enables a decision as to going out of business and early business revitalization.

< By Keiko Ikeda published April 22, 2014 Chubu Keizai newspaper “Medium through Tribune” Heisei>