農地農舍之相關議題,在研究不動產之領域中,向來是不可或缺的一部份,因農地肩負糧食生產之重責大任,因此,如何保護農地、維持農用,是我國土地政策中極待討論之議題。 本文之綱要,就是以共有物分割為核心,探討在農地分割行為中所衍生出關於耕地分割、農地農舍移轉、套繪管制與解除、農舍之興建等四個議題,在法令規範及實務運作層面究竟有什麼問題,以實務之角度,希冀分析出現行農地利用之困境與解決之道。 本文較特殊之二個地方,一是導入田園調查法,以問卷之方式調查約200位地政士或登記助理員,來了解基層工作者對農地農舍業務之執行有何困難,希望透過問卷之分析,來了解應該修正之地方有那些?二是除了法院之案例外,本文也蒐集了行政釋示之案例,因為行政上之實際案例,是了解實務運作最好的方法,可以了解公部門之思考方向,是以另一個角度,分析農地農舍之實際運作。 國土計畫法施行在即 ,農業發展地區即將劃設 ,農地利用管制可能趨於嚴格,但不變的是「農地農用」之目標,如果本文的分析,可以作為未來農地農舍相關法律修正之參考,將是本文最大之價值。
Since agricultural lands are crucial to food production, relative issues on agricultural lands and farmhouses have always been indispensable in real estate research. Hence, how to protect agricultural lands and ensure that farmlands are continuously for agricultural use is urgently to be discussed in Taiwan’s land policy. The article, using the partition of the thing held in indivision as core, explores legislative and practical problems of four issues derived from the act of dividing agricultural land: division of arable land, transfer of agricultural land and farmhouse, map overlay control and deregulation, and farmhouse construction. It is hoped that predicaments and solutions of current agricultural land use can be analyzed from the perspective of practice. There are two special places in the article. One is the introduction of field study. A survey of about 200 land administration agents or assistants is conducted to understand the difficulties faced by grassroots workers in professional practice of agricultural land and farmhouse business. We hope what should be corrected can be found in the analysis conducted through questionnaires. Secondly, in addition to court cases, this article has also collected cases of administrative interpretation, the best way to understand how public sector operated and its direction of thinking, to analyze actual operation of agricultural land and farmhouse. The implementation of Spatial Planning Act is imminent, and agricultural development areas will soon be designated. Control over the use of agricultural land may become rigorous. However, the objective of “agricultural land for agricultural use” remains unchanged. The biggest value of this article may be shown if the analysis can be adopted as a reference to future amendments to relative laws of agricultural land and farmhouse.