臺灣從日據時期開始，即有許多土地一直沒有辦理繼承登記，而其未為繼承登記者，往往具有其難為登記之複雜背景，並非故意不為登記。因數量龐大，與日劇增，嚴重地影響地籍、稅籍之正確與政府之施政，為求解決，政府爰於六十四年間以增訂土地法第七十三條之一規定逾期未辦繼承登記者代管九年，期滿仍未辦理繼承登記，逕為收歸國有的方法，嘗試解決問題，惟因法條所定逕為收歸國有之規定，與立法所欲達到之促請繼承人儘速申辦繼承登記、整理地籍及促進土地利用之目的相較，似有違反憲法第二十三條「所必要」之「比例原則」之疑義。在八十九年土地法再度修法時，乃將其備受爭議之規定修改為列冊管理十五年，期滿仍未辦理繼承登記者，即移請國有財產局辦理公開標售。 未辦繼承登記之土地數量，在土地法八十九年修訂後，未見有減少之跡象，可知民眾並不會因為土地法明文規定，將移請財政部國有財產局辦理標售等因素考量，而辦理繼承登記，實際上如果無法辦理繼承登記之原因或問題無法獲得根本解決，則即使政府立法強制規定，亦無法因此促使民眾申辦繼承登記。即法條之修正並無法解決實質之問題，其問題之本質仍在。 本文從繼承與繼承登記相關文獻，歸納分析繼承之法律關係，探討分析繼承理論之思想發展，並探討繼承制度之存廢，以及逾期未辦繼承登記產生之背景與實務處理未辦繼承登記不動產所遭遇之困難後，藉其推導整理獲致下列數項結論： 一、主張繼承仍應存在，為減少繼承造成之不平等，可透過課稅之方式，而不宜剝奪繼承人之財產權。 二、國家應從協助及獎勵繼承人辦理繼承登記之面向著手，而不是將逾期未辦繼承登記之不動產以消極地列管十五年後即移請國有財產局辦理標售之方法來解決。 三、對解決久懸之逾期未辦繼承登記不動產所造成之地籍失實等問題絲毫沒有幫助。 / From the Taiwan was occupied by Japan, there are a lot of land unregistered for succession. The reason of land unregistered for succession is that they have difficult factors of registered. They didn’t unregistered intentionally. Because of much land unregistered for succession, and they are increasing year by year. This situation is seriously that makes the inaccuracy datas of land and tax. For solved this problem, the Government draw up NO.73-1 of “THE LAND OF LAW” in 1975. The stipulation is land unregistered for succession will be managed about 9 years, if behind time that will be force to register the nation land. But this stipulation makes people query that it breaches the proportion principle of NO.23 of THE CONSTITUTION. In 2000, the Government redraws up NO.73-1 of “THE LAND OF LAW”. The stipulation is land unregistered for succession will be managed about 15 years, if behind time that will be sell by tender. The amount of land unregistered for succession didn’t decrease after 2000. We know that if the factor of registered for succession couldn’t be solved, even though the government to legislate the article to force the heir apparent to register.