我國行政法院對損失補償採取「無法律即無補償」之見解,未落實損失補償法理之目的,與憲法基本權保障之價值牴觸。在理論方面,我國學界、憲法法庭,及行政法院,對損失補償理論之見解並不一致,亦罕有對損失補償為完整論述。前述情況對人民主張損失補償權利形成障礙,亟需予以改善。 為此,本文深入分析我國損失補償之相關規定及憲法解釋,提出對既有損失補償規範之體系性的解釋論觀點,並對行政法院實務予以批判。本文更認為,建立完整的損失補償理論基礎,才是解決問題的根本方法。本文透過對損失補償發展之考究,認為損失補償之基本原理應為「個人權利保護」與「對抗國家權力」,並以此為基礎,嘗試重構以憲法基本權保障為核心的損失補償理論,提出符合法制與實務所需的理論。
In practice, the ‘NO LAW, NO COMPENSATION’ opinion adopted by the Administrative Courts in Taiwan regarding administrative compensation cases have not implemented the objective of the principle of compensation. This opinion is in conflict with the value of the constitutional protection of fundamental rights. In terms of theory, the interpretations of the administrative compensation legal theory are inconsistent between academia, the Constitutional Court and the Administrative Courts, and there are few comprehensive discourses on this theory. The aforementioned circumstances are obstacles for people to claim administrative compensation, and require urgent improvements. In order to deal with the problem above, this paper makes a profound analysis on laws and constitutional interpretations that concern administrative compensation. The author also proposes a systematic perspective of legal interpretation on existing administrative compensation norms, and criticizes judgements made by the Administrative Courts. Furthermore, the author believes that establishing a complete theoretical foundation of the administrative compensation legal theory is an essential solution to the problem. By investigating the development of administrative compensation, this paper argues that ‘the protection of individual rights’ and ‘the resistance to state power’ are the fundamentals of administrative compensation. On the basis of these two concepts, this paper attempts to reconstruct the administrative compensation legal theory, which adopts the constitutional protection of fundamental rights as its core, and puts forward the theory that will meet the needs of both legal system and legal practice.