在提倡对财产最大限度利用的近现代法制下,围绕同一财产而发生抵押权和租赁权的情况并不罕见。同为财产利用,抵押权设置的目的是把控抵押财产的交换价值,租赁权则是为获取租赁物的使用价值。一般情形下,两者因对财产的关注点不同而具有了并存于同一物的基础,并能和谐相处。然而,当抵押权人行使抵押权时,负担于抵押物上的租赁权将抑制抵押物的交换价值,必然带来抵押权与租赁权的冲突。为此,各国立法大多对抵押权和租赁权冲突作出了规定,并在不同的价值取向下,就两者的冲突及解决作出立法安排。中国从最高人民法院司法解释到物权法对此都有相关的规 Under the modern legal system that advocates the maximum use of property, it is not uncommon for mortgages and tenancies around the same property. The same for the use of property, the purpose of setting the mortgage is to control the exchange of value of the property, the lease is to obtain the value of the use of the lease. Under normal circumstances, both because of the different concerns of the property have the coexistence of the same thing, and can live in harmony. However, when the mortgagee exercises the mortgage right, the rental right borne on the mortgage object will restrain the exchange value of the mortgage and inevitably bring the conflict between the mortgage right and the lease right. For this reason, the legislation of most countries stipulates the conflicts of mortgage rights and tenancy rights, and makes legislative arrangements regarding the conflicts and settlements under different values. China from the judicial interpretation of the Supreme People’s Court to the Real Right Law have relevant regulations