摘要 「祭祀公業」乃基於傳統習慣所形成擁有特殊性之「共有」，係以祭祀祖先為目的所設立之獨立財產。本文研究乃以祭祀公業條例第五十條規範過去所設立祭祀公業法人與現行民法成立之財團法人（宗祠財團法人）其設立目的及宗旨是否相同，又本條例針對過去設立之祭祀公業法人格之取得及未取得法人格時土地權屬應如何處理，及其條例規定衍生派下現員權屬爭議、及男女平權繼承是否妥當，予以分析祭祀公業權屬爭議問題。試圖從慎終追遠及延續傳統宗族舊慣的角度，以分析祭祀公業之權屬結構，盼能指出台灣從過去到現在實施清理祭祀公業政策之盲點，俾利政府實施祭祀公業清理制度的處理原則及法令修訂時的參考。 本文第二章有關祭祀公業及其相關規定之探討：就祭祀公業緣起、意義、制度沿革、派下的權利與義務及權屬爭議之解釋、判決、判例、規定加以彙整，並以祭祀公業之法律性質、派下員申報及登記、廢止解散等權屬問題之予以論述；第三章祭祀公業主體性問題之探討，首先是應探究祭祀公業共有法人所有之差異性；其次過去設立之祭祀公業法人格土地權屬之分析，另規範過去所設立祭祀公業財團法人（宗祠財團法人）之爭議問題；第四章以派下現員之清理、派下權與房份配置及祭祀公業之解散，並深入分析祭祀公業權屬爭議問題。 第五章結論與建議：第一、祭祀公業取得派下全員證明書後，依據私法自治原則及法律本質決定其權屬關係為「祭祀公業法人」，以符合下列祭祀公業原設立之宗旨。第二、祭祀公業依過去法令所設立宗祠財團法人，應准其辦理更名登記為祭祀公業法人，以符合祭祀公業之法律本質、設立宗旨及其主體性。第三、派下員之繼受取得應依設立時章程（鬮書）之約定；未約定時，則依宗祧繼承男子繼承為原則，女子繼承為例外。現存之祭祀公業，既係日據時期所設立，自應適用設立當時之繼承習慣。若為解決男女平權繼承的問題，而恣意以現代民法所規定之男女平權繼承概念予以清理，將導致產權複雜化及違背台灣先民設立祭祀公業慎終追遠之宗旨。第四、祭祀公業解散清算分配賸餘財產時應依設立時章程（鬮書）之約定；未約定時，則依舊慣以房份為原則，均分（推定均等）為例外。最後提出後續研究建議，首先，祭祀公業清理被編定公共設施用地者之財產權保障問題；再者，祭祀公業之資產委由「公益信託」管理之可行性；暨派下權之繼受制度如何定位以符合我國舊慣等，這些議題都值得深入研究。而本文期盼祭祀公業清理制度之實施，能明確界定派下員之權屬關係，以落實財產權之保障。 關鍵字：祭祀公業、法人、宗祠財團法人、男女平權繼承、鬮書 / Abstract “Ancestral estate” is a special, independent property of “joint ownership” formed by tradition and custom, whose purpose is to worship clan ancestors. This study intends to research the similarity of the purpose and objective for establishing the ancestral estate juridical person, governed by Article 50 of the “Statue Governing the Ancestral Estate” and the foundation (Ancestral Shrine Foundation), governed by the Civil Code. By focusing on the following issues: (a) Land ownership before and after acquiring corporate personality of ancestral estate; (b) Authority controversy between clan members; and (c) The appropriateness of inheritance equality between men and women, this study tries to analyze the authority structure of ancestral estate from the perspectives of “due sacrifice for the ancestor” and continuation of traditional custom of clan ancestor worshiping. The purpose of this study is to pinpoint the blind spot existing in the past and current governmental policy concerning ancestral estate so that the government may find useful reference in future implementation of relevant systems and enactment of regulations. Chapter two discusses the nature of ancestral estate and its related regulations: the origin, meaning, historic system timeline, rights and obligation of clan members, and the compilation of controversial interpretations, judgments, precedents, and regulation. Further discussion will also be given on the legal nature, reporting of clan member, and the authorities regarding the revocation and dissolution of organization. Chapter three discusses the subject matters of ancestral estate. Firstly, the difference between the juridical persons of ancestral estate is discussed. Secondly, analyze the land ownership of ancestral estate and regulate the issues existing in the ancestral estate foundation (Ancestral Shrine Foundation). Chapter four deals with the sorting out of clan members, share allocation of property ownership, dissolution of ancestral estate, and an in-depth analysis will also be given on the authority controversies. Conclusion and suggestion will be provided in Chapter five: (1) After acquiring staff certificate of ancestral estate, the ancestral estate shall be deemed as a “ancestral estate juridical person” in accordance with the principle of autonomy and legal nature of private law, to meet the following establishing objectives; (2) The ancestral shrine foundation established in accordance with past regulations shall be allowed to change name and registered as ancestral estate juridical person to meet the legal nature, establishing objective and objectivity; and (3) The inheritance acquisition of clan members shall abide by the terms and conditions set forth in the articles (book of property inheritance); in the event of no agreement is made, the principle of male inheritance in accordance with clan pedigree shall govern, with female inheritance as exception. The existing ancestral estate was first established in the Japanese occupation period, which was applicable to the inheritance practices of the time. If, in order to solve the inheritance equality problem between both sexes, the competent authority tries to sort out in an arbitrary way the current issue with the concept of modern Civil Code, it is bound to cause complexity and in violation to the objective of due offerings set forth by Taiwanese ancestors; (4) The ancestral estate shall set up articles (book of property inheritance) governing its dissolution, liquidation, allocation of residual property; if no agreement is made, it shall be based on pedigree as principle, with even distribution (assumed even) as exception. Finally, suggestions will be provided for subsequent studies concerning: Property protection regarding public facilities designated for the sorting out of ancestral estate; The feasibility of “public trust” management of the assets of ancestral estate; and how to position the system of inheritance acquisition in order to meet the national custom and traditional practices. The main purpose of this study is to realize the protection of property by giving a clearly defined authority of clan members through the implementation of sorting out system of ancestral estate. Keywords：Ancestral estate；Juridical person； Ancestral Shrine Foundation ； Equal inheritance of both sexes； book of property inheritance