區段徵收理論與實務探討-以抵價地制度為中心

The Theory and Practice of Zone Expropriation- Focus on the Compensation System to Levied Land

張雅惠(Ya-Hui Chang)

指導教授 ： 陳櫻琴

中原大學/商學院/財經法律研究所/碩士(2015年)

https://doi.org/10.6840/CYCU.2015.00222

摘要

我國土地徵收制度實施至今，區段徵收的制度為目前行政機關常用來開發建設取得用地的方式，其中的抵價地補償方式為我國僅有世界上無其他國採用的。長期以來，土地取得採用徵收的手段，對人民的財產權、生存權等基本權利影響甚鉅。政府因財務因素考量，採用抵價地模式區段徵收取得公共建設用地，並從中獲得剩餘可供建築用地來配售取得利益，以及引入民間資源來參與；使得原本設計為公共建設利益的政府和地主合作開發，變質為財團與政府獲利的天堂。
　有關區段徵收的法律相當繁雜，目前雖然已有制定土地徵收條例，但區段徵收的相關法規分散在許多不同的法律。區段徵收實施的方式本身具有公權力的手段，強制剝奪人民財產權，在實務上也造成許多爭議案件。另外，區段徵收本身有別一般徵收的抵價地補償制度，使得原有徵收範圍面積擴大，引發徵收本身的公共利益是否存在、土地財產權的交換分配、補償計算基準等等相關的爭議，有別於一般徵收的現金補償。依國家的政策面、經濟面、制度面設計與人民的基本權保障如何相符合，是民主法治國相當重要的基本問題。本文嘗試即由區段徵收的制度沿革及抵價地補償模式的設計為範圍，從我國的行政與司法制度面對基本權的保障理論與限制角度來檢視；並利用法院實務案件來分析，研究區段徵收以抵價地為補償的設計，是否符合作為公共利益徵收補償的基本要件，以及桃園航空城案來剖析現行實務區段徵收有關抵價地制度設計問題。

關鍵字

桃園航空城 ； 基本權 ； 公共利益 ； 抵價地制度 ； 區段徵收

並列摘要

Since the system of Land Expropriation was put into practice in Taiwan, Zone Expropriation has been cited by administrations to acquire land for public construction and exploitation. Of all nations, besides, Taiwan is the only one performing Compensation for Levied Land. Though the authorities have cited the bills to obtain plenty of aggregate lots for mass construction for a long time, people’s rights of property and living are under the malign sway of these bills. Here is the reason. For local governments’ limited budget, Land for Compensation is resorted to acquire land from land lords in the name of public construction. Most of it is for public purpose truly, but the rest is rationed to businesses in order to attract investments and gain profits for the government. After the businesses get the land, it becomes a tool of speculation. In this way, Land for compensation was originally a government and land lords’ win-win design, but unfortunately, it turns into a government and syndicates’ baton for a symphony of mutual benefits.
The related statutes of Zone Expropriation are fairly complex, and most of them are scattered in various laws. Especially, Zone Expropriation is equipped with coercive power; that is, to deprive people’s property right is authorized and has easily and actually resulted in lots of controversial cases. In addition, General Expropriation, cash for compensation, is different from Zone Expropriation, Compensation for Levied Land, which frequently allows governments to expand expropriated area so as to initiate fierce debates on whether there are public benefits in the expropriation, the exchange and distribution of land property, the standard of compensation, and so forth. Therefore, how to fit people’s basic rights with national policy, economy, and design of laws is a significant issue for a democratic country.
The study begins with the introduction of the history of Zone Expropriation and tries to inspect the design of its Land for Compensation from the angle of protection and limitation theory in our country’s administrative and jurisdictional system. Further, I am going to quote court cases to analyze if Land for Compensation in Zone Expropriation meets the basic compensatory conditions for public purpose. Also, I would like to reveal the designing problems of Compensation system for Levied Land, take Taoyuan　Aerotropolis for example in Zone Expropriation.

並列關鍵字

taoyuanaerotropolis ； public interest ； compensation system for levied land ； basic right ； zone expropriation

參考文獻

4.孫寶鉅，政府土地開發機制改進策略之研究－台北港特定區之分析，國立台灣政治學研究所碩士論文，2004年。

25.黃宗樂，土地徵收補償法上若干問題之研討，臺大法學論叢，第21卷第1期，頁5-6(1992)。

14.莊仲甫，土地徵收條例修正對區段徵收之影響，土地問題研究季刊，第11卷第2期，頁31-41(2012)。

41.鍾麗娜，區段徵收－主要行為者汲取土地開發利得的天堂?，土地問題研究季刊，第10卷第4期，頁101-106(2011)。

38.鍾麗娜，區段徵收制度之政經分析，土地問題研究季刊，第2卷第1期，頁32-52(2003)。