我國係承認私有財產制之國家，土地財產權自為憲法所保障，其方式首需建立地籍制度，透過測量與登記二大程序，調查土地「質」與「量」之真實狀況，建立圖籍，予以動態管理，使財產權明確化，財產權人對於土地所具有之地位，在此制度中得到確保，任何人可由外部確認其土地之狀態，並足以排除他人之侵害，俾減少交易風險，提升社會整體經濟福利，亦使財產權於特別犧牲時的補償更為確實，從而「仁政必自經界始」，土地財產權，需要透過法律制度明確界定其標示、屬性與權利，使地籍內容與現實相符，始有保障之功能可言。 台灣的地籍圖源自於日治時期所測繪，原圖已因戰禍毀滅，留存之副圖因年久破損、伸縮誤差、地形變更等等原因，致圖、地、簿常有不符，爰生地籍圖重測之必要，自民國六十四年土地法確立重測之法律依據以來，雖辦理效益卓著，然而進度緩慢，面積及界址爭議仍不間斷，如能研究改進，不僅有助於重測之進度成效，更可進一步便利土地利用及落實財產權保障。而重測之性質，乃在利用地籍調查、樁位清理等方法認定地籍界址後，透過測量技術再完整反應於地籍圖，是以關於界址認定，包括地籍調查所認定之所有權界址及樁位清理所認定之逕為分割界址，其認定結果對於面積、所有權範圍、土地屬性的影響皆鉅，是為本文研究之重心。 本研究進行之方向，不做測量理論與技術的闡釋，而係注重財產權人之權益，從行政面、法規面予以探討。研究發現，重測法令尚稱健全，惟部分規定有逾越法律授權範圍之虞。關於樁位界址之認定，須符合財產權保障之信賴、平等、比例等基本原則，且不能違反規劃原意及逾越法定誤差範圍，並應進一步將樁位、地籍與都市計畫圖整合。在地籍調查之界址認定上，建議不動產糾紛調處委員會，應修正利益迴避條款，而有關未到場指界者不得申請異議複丈之規定，有違比例原則，亦應予修正。 本研究從財產權保障的觀點出發就重測之意涵及其與財產權保障之關係做探討，以明白界址認定於財產權保障的重要性。次就重測之整體法制情形及界址認定之程序、法令規定加以探討，就歷史源由與現實需要，釐清界址認定之本質。最後，針對實務上問題，從財產權角度分析相關做法與疑義，並提出制度上應改進之道及後續研究方向，期能促使重測作業更臻完善，落實土地財產權保障。

臺灣之地籍圖，乃係承襲自1903年日治時期所測製完成而以人工方式謄繪的地籍副圖，經國民政府於1945年接收後，由本省各地政事務所延續使用迄今，其齡高達103歲，為我國現今以圖籍記錄人民財產權範圍的唯一原始依據。 / 但日治土地調查規則早於1898年7月的前清時期即已制定，而土地法及其施行法係國民政府在1936年3月訓政時期所令頒施行的產物，兩者法制規範相隔達40年之遙，何以在不同政體下各所依據之法理卻能取得一致？否則臺灣地籍圖依法即無立錐之地。由於歷史承接，混沌不明，以致成為謎樣的年代，相關研究普遍缺乏深入分析，本文為使原貌重現，填補歷史影像，故為論述傾注重心。 / 臺灣省行政長官公署在光復初期，認為：日治時期臺灣省地籍測量與地籍調查之程序與精度符合我國土地法規定，故免予重辦地籍測量，並以局部改正之「修補」方式替代「整理」地籍，一舉完成臺灣土地總登記。 / 事實上，透過我國土地法典分析，雖然日治地籍測量外觀上之「程序」符合土地法第44條之規定，但深入剖視後，其「實體」部分則完全無法見容於我國地籍測量法制規範，縱使1945年5月間存置於臺灣總督府之日治地籍原圖未遭炸燬滅失，仍不能治癒其在法制上之闕失病症。 / 臺灣光復後未及數載，圖籍病態逐漸接踵浮現，已難再掩飾其症，非重新「改測」無以回春。惟臺灣省政府自民國45年度起實施地籍圖修正測量至64年度止之試辦地籍圖重測，在長達二十年間的臺灣圖籍重建工作，竟係處於無法律明文依據之情況下所進行，除明顯未臻妥適之外，更不符「法律保留」原則。 / 迨1975年7月間修正土地法，增訂第46條之1、第46條之2、第46條之3等三個條文，始為臺灣地籍圖重測建構法制根基。但由於立法層面思慮不盡周全，形成重大缺漏，非僅未能有效釐整地籍，反因重測地籍調查指界衍生出更進一步的爭議。諸如：到場指界者顯然逾越至毗鄰未到場之土地所有權支配範圍、抑或毗鄰未登記土地時，剝奪私有地之指界權，但公有土地則自成免疫系統排除法規範約制、甚至限縮各土地共有人依法均得單獨指界之權利及義務、…等多項法制闕失，主管機關仍縱任三十年而未正視，與憲法保障人民財產權意旨似相背違。 / 由於臺灣省猶有高達400萬筆以上之土地，亟待實施地籍圖重測，仍須面對上述各項法律疑義癥結；因此，歸結本研究結果，提出改進方向及相關條文之修法建議，為未來地籍圖重測，尋覓出賡續發展之經營脈絡。 / The Taiwan Cadastral map adopts basically the code of Japanese statutes, which is a manually drawn copy of the cadastral map of a cadastral surveying project completed in 1903 under the Japanese statutes. Since the time it was received by the R.O.C. central government in 1945, it has been used by the various local offices of land administration ever since. It is 103 years old and is now the only original foundation being used as the map document recording the scope of people’s property right. / But the land survey regulations under the Japan statutes was enacted back in July 1898 during the period of the Ching Dynasty, while the land law and its implementation regulation were enacted in March 1936 during the period of political tutelage. There were 40 years between the times of enactment of the two laws, but how could the bases of law principles under different political entities be coinciding? Otherwise, the Taiwan Cadastral map would have no ground to stand. Because of the historical transitions, information and data are indefinite, which was a time of ambiguity. Besides, the related researches are generally lack of in-depth analyses. In order to reappear the original look and to supplement historical images, this writing places great emphases on the studies. / In the early stage of the retrocession, the administrative chief office of Taiwan province deemed that the procedure and accuracy of the Taiwan cadastral survey and cadastral investigation under the Japan statutes were in compliance with the regulations of our country’s land law. Therefore, a second cadastral survey was not needed, and took the way of partial “supplement” instead of “overhaul” of the land file, thus the general Taiwan land registration was completed with a single blow. / In fact, through an analysis of land law of this country, though the “procedure” of cadastral survey under the Japan statutes is in compliance with the regulation of article 44 of the land law; when it is paid an important examination, its “entity” is completely unacceptable to the regulations of our cadastral survey law. Although the original cadastral map of the Japan statutes placed in the Taiwan Viceroy office did not destroyed or damaged by the bombing in May 1945. it would not cure the diseases of the legal system. / In a few years after the Taiwan retrocession, the flaws of the land file began to emerge. It is impossible to cover any more the defects, and the only way to get its healthy condition back was a new “corrective survey.” However, the Taiwan Provincial Government implemented a trial new cadastral survey from 1956 to 1975 for a corrective survey. During the 20-year long Taiwan cadastral reconstruction operations, it was inappropriately conducted under a condition without a legal written basis, which is obviously improper and let alone the principle of “Gesetzesvorbehalt.” / It was not until July 1975 when the Land Law was amended with the addition of Article 46.1, Article 46.2, and Article 46.3, the reconstruction of Taiwan Cadastral map was established. Nevertheless, the considerable flaws were resulted due to the incomplete planning and research in the legislate area beforehand. Not only the operations of survey and reconstruction were not effectively performed, but also more controversial issues were produced. For instance, the present landmark indicator obviously goes beyond the boundary to the neighbor land ownership control scope of the absent one; or to deprive the landmark indicating right of private property while the neighbor scope is not property registered. On the contrary, the public property with what is called immune system, is free of the legal constraint of regulations and rules, and further to limit or minimize the legal rights and obligations of single landmark indicating of joint tenants, etc. Such numerous lawful defects are intentionally ignored by the responsible authorities for as long as thirty years, which is apparently against the purpose of protect the people’s property right of the Constitution. / There are more than 400 million land cases in Taiwan demanding a second cadastral survey, with the objective to resolve the above-mentioned crucial problems. To summarize the research result, a correct direction for future development and improvement, as well as some suggestions for amendment of related articles and clauses are consequently presented, with the objective to perform continuous advancement and operation of prospective cadastral survey.