担保物权以确保债权人的债权实现为目的，能够减少社会风险，促进社会融资。2012 年民事诉讼法新增的用特别程序实现担保物权成为修订案中不可忽视的亮点。修订案中进一步明确了管辖规则、申请人规则、法院审查规则、救济规则等，这对于解决理论界争议和实务中具体操作难题意义重大。实现担保物权特别程序制度优势十分显著，它能迅速有效保障债权人实现债权。这不仅仅有利于实现特别程序自身价值，同时也有利于实现实体法自身目标。特别程序实现担保物权只有两个法律条文，法律规定较为粗略、笼统，入法不久尚缺乏相应的细化规定，以致于司法操作容易引起争议分歧。因此亟待探究司法实务中出现的问题，分析出现之因，并在考察借鉴外国实现担保物权的经验智慧基础之上，有针对性地提出相应完善途径。 本文主要以2012 年民事诉讼法修订案中新增的用特别程序实现担保物权为研究重点，围绕着实现担保物权特别程序的问题探究及完善途径展开。从内容结构来看本文主要分为导论、现状及问题、理论构建、进一步完善四个核心部分。第一章是本文的导论部分，重点是把握当前学术理论界的研究现状，分别论述我国台湾地区和域外地区对于相关问题的研究情况，之后针对本文的研究方法和创新之处进行了阐述。在大致了解整体的研究状况后，接着是本文的主体部分，用三大章节进行阐释。第二章主要是对实现担保物权问题进行考察。内容涉及到司法指导层面各地法院指导意见不一，法官对于法律及解释观点不一致，导致司法实务界分歧丛生，用特别程序实现担保物权使用率普遍不高。第三章的重点是构建本文的理论基础。首先对担保物权特别程序进行性质定位，继而探究立法背后的价值追求，最后对域外司法的有益经验进行借鉴和思考，从而为下一部分的问题解决提供理论支撑。第四章详细论述司法实务中存在的一些问题，涉及到管辖、关于主债务人的地位、异议的审查标准、送达方式等，并在综合分析第三章主要国家和地区对此类情况的做法，吸收可借鉴的理性做法，结合中国现实情况，寻找适宜用特别程序解决担保物权的本土资源，进一步探究特别程序实现担保物权的完善措施，这些措施包括：明确对于管辖中担保登记地法院是指登记机关所在地，而不是登记行为发生地；实现担保物权诉讼程序既可以依附于主债务纠纷提出，也可以单独提出；被申请人提出异议的除非案件明显存在民事权益争议，否则要求其供相应的证据；不适宜将主债务人列为被申请人；公告送达的公示期的调整；特别程序实现担保物权的收费标准；兼顾公平实现债务人、担保人和担保物权人的利益的平衡，可以补充完善被申请人救济途径等。笔者试图结合立法规定、司法解释、法院实务需要试图提出完善的建议，进而为中国法治建设进程提供有益的帮助。

The purpose of real right of guarantee is to ensure the realization of creditor's right, which can reduce social risk and promote social financing. In the civil procedure law of 2012, the implementation of real right for security through special procedures has become a highlight that cannot be ignored in the amendment. The revision further clarifies the jurisdiction rules, the applicant rules, the court review rules, the relief rules, etc., which is of great significance for solving the disputes in the theoretical circle and the specific operational problems in practice. The system of special procedure of real right for security has obvious advantages, which can guarantee the creditor to realize the creditor's right quickly and effectively. This is not only conducive to the realization of the value of special procedures, but also conducive to the realization of the objectives of substantive law itself. There are only two legal provisions for the realization of real right for security in special procedures. The legal provisions are relatively rough and general, and there is still a lack of corresponding detailed provisions after being incorporated into the law. As a result, the judicial operation is likely to give rise to disputes and disagreements. Therefore, it is urgent to explore the problems in judicial practice, analyze the reasons for the problems, and on the basis of studying the experience and wisdom of foreign countries to realize the real right of guarantee, put forward corresponding improvement measures. This paper focuses on the realization of real right for security with special procedures added in the amendment of civil procedure law in 2012, and focuses on the exploration and improvement of the realization of special procedures for real right for security. From the perspective of content structure, this paper is mainly divided into four core parts: introduction, current situation and problems, theoretical construction and ways to improve. The first chapter is the introduction of this paper, which focuses on the current research status of academic and theoretical circles, respectively discusses the research situation of related issues in Taiwan and other regions of China, and then elaborates on the research methods and innovations of this paper. After the general understanding of the overall research situation, followed by the main part of this paper, with three chapters to explain. The second chapter is about the realization of real right of guarantee. The content involves the level of judicial guidance, different opinions of the courts around the guidance, judges on the law and interpretation of the views are inconsistent, leading to the judicial practice of disagreement, the use of special procedures to achieve the real right of guarantee is generally not high. The third chapter focuses on the construction of judicial practice differences and ways to improve the theoretical basis. Firstly, the nature of the special procedure of real right for security is defined, and then the value pursuit behind the legislation is explored. Finally, the beneficial experience of foreign judicature is learned and reflected, so as to provide theoretical support for the solution of the problem in the next part. The fourth chapter discusses in detail some problems existing in the judicial practice, involving jurisdiction, regarding the status of the principal, objection review standards, ways of service, etc., and in the third chapter comprehensive analysis of main countries and regions on the practice of this kind of situation, absorption can draw lessons from the rational approach, combined with China's reality, looking for suitable use special program to solve real rights for security of the local resources, and further to explore the special procedure to realize the improvement of the real rights for security measures, these measures include: clear to guarantee that in the jurisdiction of the court is located, refers to the registration authority rather than registration act occurred; The real right for security litigation procedure can be attached to the main debt dispute or put forward separately; Where the respondent raises an objection, unless the case is obviously a dispute over civil rights and interests, it shall be required to provide corresponding evidence; It is not appropriate to list the principal debtor as the respondent; Adjustment of the public notice period served by public announcement; Special procedures to realize the fee standard of real right for security; Balancing the interests of the debtor, the guarantor and the real right holder of security fairly can complement and perfect the relief approaches of the respondent. The author tries to combine the legislative provisions, judicial interpretation and practical needs of the court to try to put forward Suggestions for improvement, so as to provide beneficial help for China's legal construction process.