在第三人侵权的情况下,安全保障义务人未尽到合理的注意义务是一种不作为侵权。我国《侵权责任法》第37条对此规定安全保障义务人承担相应的补充责任,但安全保障义务人是否享有全额追偿权,法条未明确规定,学界对此也存在争议。本文将从几个方面来论证第三人侵权下安全保障义务人追偿权之不合理。 In the case of infringement by the third party, the failure of the obligor of security guarantee to perform a reasonable duty of care is an act of infringement. Article 37 of China’s “Tort Liability Law” stipulates that the obligor of safety protection undertakes the corresponding supplementary responsibility, but whether the obligor of safety protection has the full right of recovery is not clearly stipulated in the law. There is also controversy in the academic circles. This article will demonstrate the irrationality of the right of recovery of obligors for safety and security under the third party infringement from several aspects.