瑕疵股权转让人的出资责任

Capital Contribution Liability of the Transferor of Defective Equity

摘要: 本文聚焦于商事交易中瑕疵股权转让所引发的原股东出资责任认定问题，深入探讨了三个核心争议焦点：首先，分析了《公司法》司法解释(三)中“未履行出资义务”认定标准的模糊性，探讨了认缴制下股东期限利益与公司资本维持原则之间的冲突；其次，研究了执行程序中追加原股东的正当性问题，探讨了该行为是否突破了“审执分离”原则以及其程序正当性的法律依据；最后，探讨了瑕疵股权转让后原股东与受让人间的责任追偿机制在《民法典》第546条下的适用困境，分析了信息不对称和责任分配失衡对受让人权益的影响。通过结合《公司法》及相关司法解释的规范基础，运用司法裁判大数据分析，并参考领域内多位专家学者的权威观点，本文系统地探讨了瑕疵股权转让中原股东出资责任的认定规则，并提出了针对性的制度完善建议，旨在为解决司法实践中的争议提供理论支持与实践指导。

Abstract: This paper focuses on determining the original shareholders’ capital contribution liability arising from defective equity transfers in commercial transactions and explores three core controversies in depth. Firstly, this paper delves into the ambiguity in the determination standard of “failure to fulfill capital contribution obligations” in the Judicial Interpretation (III) of the Company Law and discusses the conflict between shareholders’ term interests under the subscribed capital system and the company’s capital maintenance principle. Secondly, it analyzes the legitimacy of adding original shareholders in enforcement procedures. It discusses whether such actions violate the principle of separation of trial and enforcement. Moreover, it analyzes the legal basis for their procedural legitimacy. Lastly, it probes into the difficulties in applying the liability compensation mechanism between the original shareholders and the transferees under Article 546 of the Civil Code of the People’s Republic of China after a defective equity transfer. It analyzes the impact of information asymmetry and unbalanced liability distribution on the transferees’ rights and interests. By combining the normative basis of the Company Law and relevant judicial interpretations, utilizing big-data-based analysis of judicial decisions, and referring to the authoritative views of experts and scholars in the field, this paper systematically explores the determination rules of the original shareholders’ capital contribution liability in defective equity transfers. It proposes targeted suggestions for system improvement, aiming to provide theoretical support and practical guidance for resolving the controversies in judicial practice.