私有財產權之保障在我國政治與經濟發展中扮演著重要的角色，但由於傳統上我國法律文化中並無權利之因素，且繼受西方國家法制時特別強調社會本位，以致憲法第十五條雖明文保障財產權，亦未能落實個人財產權免於國家公權力侵犯之核心。大法官釋字第三三六號解釋認為都市計劃法第五十條就公共設施保留地之取得不設期限係合憲，即是未能保障財產權之例子。
本文為建立財產權基本理論，從財產權之定義、財產權合理化理論及財產權理論之運用三方面著手。在何謂財產權專章中，析述財產權定義、特權、功能及缺失。在財產權合理化理論專章中，本文介紹現代最早之財產權理論(即先占理論)、勞力理論、人格發展理論、功效主義財產權理論及羅爾斯之分配正義理論。其中，個人擁有自身乃先占理論與勞力理論之源頭；功效主義理論認為財產權係因社會需要而生；人格發展理論認為財產權將人的意志具現在外部領域；羅爾斯之分配主義理論試圖建立同世代與世代間利用物質資源之公平正義。上述理論須經過重構後，方能深植在我國法律文化中。在財產權理論運用專章中，本文嚐試運用各種財產權理論於我國憲法財產權保障制度和徵收制度上。就憲法財產權保障制度而言，本文援引洛克天賦權利理論，認為財產權係先於國家存在之權利，並引伸出防禦權及有限政府之概念，避免過於偏重社會義務或國家義務之財產權制度。就徵收制度而言，本文評析大法官釋字第二三六號、三三六號、四００號及四四０號解釋。釋字第二三六號、三三六號解釋，偏重於社會整體利益之考量，犧牲個人財產權，釋字第四００號解釋則建立政府公權力不得侵犯個人及財產權係實現個人人格發展之概念，後者雖已將洛克及黑格爾理論共治一爐，此為我國憲法上財產權保障之大事，但從其前後不一貫之立場，我國財產權制度仍有尚待努力之處。 / The protection of property plays an important role in political and economic development of Taiwan. But in tradition there was no factor of right in our legal culture, and especially considered social interests when we adopted and learned from western legal systems. It can't make people prevent from intervention of state power although Article 15 of Constitutional Law prescribes protection of property. For example, the interpretation of No.336 of Grand Justice upheld Article 50 of City Planning Law deleting deadline of public reservation. The said interpretation is a bad example.
The goal of this dissertation is to establish fundamental theory of property. It is divided into three parts: what is property, why is property and how is property. Part I (what is property) analyzes definition of property. It also proceeds about characters、functions and flaws of property. Part Ⅱ(why is property) introduces the earliest modern theory of property (i.e., first occupancy theory)、labor theory、utilitarian property theory、personality development theory and Rawl's distributive justice theory. Suum is the origin of first occupancy theory and labor theory. Utilitarianism argues that property is derived from social demand. Rawl's distributive justice theory desires to establish the justice of using material about the same generation and the different generations. Only after reconstructing the said theories, property can deep input into our legal culture. Part Ⅲ (how is property) uses the said property theories to property protection of Constitutional Law and takings . For establishing the more protection system of property in Constitutional Law, it should employ natural right theory. And then it will produce the concept of negative right and limited government in Taiwan. It also can prevent from over - emphasising social obligations of individual and positive functions of state. In discussing takings, this dissertation analyzes the interpretation of No.236、No.336、No.400 and No.440 of Grand Justice. The interpretations of No.236 and No. 336 stress the importance of whole social interests, but it overlooks the individual right. The interpretation of No.400 constructs the concepts of limited state power and personality development. The latter is the turning point of property protection in our Constitutional Law. But oberserving contradiction of the said interpretations of Grand Justice, we still need to endeavor to establish the better system of property in our country.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:CHENGCHI/A2002000328 |
| Creators | 魏千峰, Wei, Chien-Feng |
| Publisher | 國立政治大學 |
| Source Sets | National Chengchi University Libraries |
| Language | 中文 |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | text |
| Rights | Copyright © nccu library on behalf of the copyright holders |
Page generated in 0.0027 seconds