臺灣祭祀公業制度變革之研究

Worship guilds in Taiwan system to reform study

高曜堂(Yao-Tang Kao)

指導教授 ： 郭振恭

中原大學/商學院/財經法律研究所/碩士(2014年)

https://doi.org/10.6840/cycu201400135

摘要

臺灣祭祀公業制度由來已久，本無實體法律依據，向為民間固有習慣之一。直至日據時期，統治者為理解臺灣固有習慣，進行了長期而全面性的調查。當時對於祭祀公業法律性質之結論，即認為此一習慣或制度並不適用於日本民法，應訂定特別法加以規範。後雖因故而未完成立法工作，仍以敕令規定祭祀公業視為習慣上法人，賦予其權利能力。
然至國民政府遷臺後，民事法院卻驟然改變過往之見解，認為祭祀公業僅為公同共有物之性質，應依民法規範，不承認祭祀公業習慣之存在。影響所及，造成日據時期以來祭祀公業之缺點不但未能去除，反而因為制度之更易，產生法律與現實脫節更為嚴重之情形。雖經行政機關多次頒布行政解釋及行政規則，民事法院亦屢以判決或司法解釋補充，例如承認派下員繼承之部分習慣效力等，仍無法徹底解決祭祀公業在習慣上、實體法與程序法間之衝突。
上述情形維持長達半世紀之久，最終仍須以訂定特別法「祭祀公業條例」藉由創設祭祀公業法人，回歸與日據時期相類似之作法，始得以解決。然或許因時代變遷所致，本條例對於祭祀公業制度之改革，不僅在於創設特殊性質法人以法人制度規範祭祀公業，內容尚包含男女平權思維而擴大派下員範圍，及以強制囑託登記為分別共有方式，以求廢止傳統祭祀公業等，均為立法者權衡固有習慣與現代化價值觀後所為之決定。
祭祀公業條例之立法固甚具時代意義，對於傳統祭祀公業制度所引發制度上及社會上諸般問題，提供終局解決方式。但或許因為本條例在制度設計上，介入私權領域過深，抑或立法者對於祭祀公業固有習慣之理解不足，以致對於私權之保護顯得難以周全。如本條例第50條為廢止祭祀公業而囑託登記之所有權持分採均等分配之方式辦理，恐與派下員之房份並不相等；同條又規定祭祀公業只能以單一種方式處理土地，不當限制祭祀公業之處分選擇權；及本條例第5條規定派下員之繼承資格須有「共同承擔祭祀」之要件，恐難以認定而增加派下員繼承時之糾紛等。
上述議題均涉及祭祀公業制度之轉變而為本研究討論範疇。本研究係從理解祭祀公業固有習慣及法律性質開始，以文獻回顧方式進行。另於日據時期、國民政府遷臺後祭祀公業制度之變革，則以法政策研究探討制度之轉變及利弊。而本條例施行後所引發之各種問題，則以行政解釋、民事法院判決、司法解釋及學者見解等為基礎，依歸納法予以綜整歸納後，研析可行方案，以期獲取制度改進之方向，並提供後續研究之參考。

關鍵字

房份 ； 派下員 ； 祭祀公業 ； 共同承擔祭祀 ； 囑託登記 ； 公同共有物

並列摘要

The Worship Guilds system in Taiwan has been implemented for long time. It did not have the Substantial Law to follow, but only the custom among the people. Until the Japanese-Occupied Period, the rulers fully and chronically investigated the Worship Guilds in Taiwan to understand the custom. The opinion of the law for the Worship Guilds was that this custom or system was not applied to the Japanese Civil Code, so it should have a special law to standardize the norm. Although the legislation of the special law was not completed due to some reasons, it still ordered the Juristic Person from the custom to empower the legal capacity in the Worship Guilds.
However, when the National Government moved to Taiwan, the Civil Court suddenly changed the previous opinion and thought the Worship Guilds should follow the Civil Code, but not the custom of Worship Guilds because of the nature of the owned-in-common property. The change influenced that the drawbacks of the Worship Guilds could not be removed since the Japanese-Occupied Period, and it was disconnected between the law and the reality. Although the administrative agency repeatedly announced administrative construction and directive, and the civil Court repeatedly administered judgment and judiciary interpretation, such as the recognition of the partial custom efficacy from the inheritance of a member of the Worship Guild, it still could not fully solve the conflicts of the Worship Guilds among the custom, Substantial Law, and procedural law.
This situation lasted over half a century, and it still needed to return to the system of Japanese-Occupied Period to administer a special law “Worship Guilds Act” and found “Juristic Person of Worship Guild” to solve the conflicts. This Act included not only the Juristic Person system to standardize the Worship Guild, but also the equal-gender initiatives to enlarge the qualification of members in the Worship Guild, as well as the land registration by government authority and co-ownership of respective shares to abolish the traditional Worship Guild. These actions are the final decisions from the legislators after weighing the original customs and current values.
The legislation of the “Worship Guilds Act” is meaningful, especially in the solutions of the conflicts of the system and society from the traditional Worship Guild, but the protection of private rights is not complete due to the broad private rights or the lack of the knowledge of the legislators toward the custom of Worship Guilds. For example, the Act #50 “In order to abolish the Worship Guilds, “The land registration by government authority should be co-ownership of equal shares” is conflict with the “Scope of Property Right and Responsibility from a member of the Worship Guild” in addition, in the same Act, only one action to transact the land, and it should not limit the transaction of the Worship Guild. Moreover, the Act #5 orders that the member of the Worship Guild should qualify the “share the duty of ancestor worship”, but it increases the chances of conflicts when the member inherits the share.
The topics discussed above in this study involve the transformation of the Worship Guilds system. The study starts from the understanding of the original custom and laws of the Worship Guilds, and then further explores the topics with the literature reviews. As to the transformation of the Worship Guilds system during the periods of Japanese-Occupied phase and the National Government moved to Taiwan, this study investigates the transformation and dis/advantages of the system from the basis of the policy. This study further provides the solutions and discussions using an inductive method on the basis of the Administrative construction, Civil court cases, Judicial construction, and researchers’ opinions. This study sheds the light on the improvement of the system and expects to be a reference for future studies.

並列關鍵字

owned-in-common property (公同共有物) ； a member of the worship guild (派下員) ； Worship guilds (祭祀公業) ； The land registration by government authority (囑託登記) ； share the duty of ancestor worship (共同承擔祭祀) ； Scope of Property Right and Responsibility (房份)

參考文獻

30、楊建華，民事訴訟法要論，自版，2007年3月。

9、王保鍵，論祭祀公業法人所觸發之男女平等問題－中國傳統文化與西方法制觀之衝突，華岡社科學報，第19期，2005年6月。

23、郭秀裕，祭祀公業第5條規定之繼承問題探討，土地問題研究季刊，中國地政研究所發行，第10卷，第3期，2011年9月。

18、莊谷中，土地法第34條之1問題評析－公同共有人價金受取之爭議，土地問題研究季刊，第33期，2010年3月。

7、內政部，祭祀公業法令彙編，內政部民政司，2011年5月。