当事人对于《公司法司法解释(三)》中规定的“不真正连带”责任与补充责任均可以利用民事诉讼法规定的“无独立请求权第三人”制度来实现对相关责任人的权利主张。不真正连带责任诉讼中,主要是因为“判决理由”与第三人相关,而补充责任诉讼中,主要是因为“判决结果”与第三人相关。两种诉讼当中均存在着“被告型第三人与辅助型第三人相互转化”的问题。同时,由于《公司法司法解释(三)》中规定的补充责任诉讼性质实际上为代位诉讼,进而不适用典型补充责任中所具有的“先诉抗辩权”规则。我国司法实践当中表现出来的“共同诉讼”情形实质上是利用“无独立请求权第三人”的制度原理来进行权利救济。 The parties concerned may use the system of “third party without independent claim” stipulated in the Civil Procedure Law to stipulate the relevant liability as stipulated in the “Third Section of the Judicial Interpretations of the Company Law” Human rights claim. Not really joint and several liability litigation, mainly because “adjudicative reasons ” related to the third party, while the supplementary liability litigation, mainly because “verdict ” related to the third party. In both cases, there exists the issue of “mutual transformation of the defendant-type third party and the auxiliary-type third party.” In the meantime, the nature of the supplementary liability proceedings stipulated in the “Company Law Judicial Interpretation (III)” is actually an act of subrogation and thus does not apply the “lawsuit of pleading” in the typical supplementary liability. The “common lawsuit” situation that is manifested in our country’s judicial practice is to use the system principle of “third party without independent claim right” to carry out right relief.