既成道路埋設管線補償機制之研究

自來水、電力、電信、瓦斯、石油等公共設施，在既成道路埋設管線時，須通過公、私有土地，早期基於公益優於私利，原則上係無償使用，僅於施工造成損害時，始予補償，相關法規亦僅規定「如有損害，應按損害程度予以補償」，惟公用事業在既成道路埋設管線時應如何補償，補償方式、補償額度為何？我國現行法令並無明確規範，是以建構補償機制，實屬刻不容緩。本研究由問卷調查分析之結果發現，一般民眾、土地所有權人、公用事業人員、學者專家等對於補償方式與補償額度方面，以贊成「設定地上權」補償方式為多數，認為大眾捷運系統、高速鐵路、下水道等，皆呈線型狀，僅使用此部份空間，而且補償額度較一般補償優厚，容易為土地所有權人所接受；同時，認為補償額度以「市場價格」，較能增加收入，改善生活，是最具體、最實際的補償額度。從統計檢定結果可以發現，就補償方式與補償額度比較而言，「土地使用費」補償額度方面並無非常顯著之差異，也就是一般民眾、私有土地所有權人、公用事業人員、學者專家等對於「土地使用費」補償額度的意見較相似。其餘，在「徵收」、「協議價購」、「租賃使用」、「公地交換」、「債券補償」、「設定地上權」補償額度方面，有顯著之差異，整體而言，受訪對象都希望公用事業在補償方式及補償額度應訂定補償機制，以保障土地所有權人權益。最後，本研究就研究結果，提出建議，供公用事業及政府研擬損失補償策略之參考。

關鍵字

損失補償；既成道路

並列摘要

The public facilities such as tap water, electricity, telephone, gas and petroleum must install underground pipelines in public and private land. In the past, the public benefits transcend the private benefits, which acquisition without consideration. Those merely give compensations while cause damages. The relevant regulation also only stipulate , “if damages should compensate according to the extent of damage” .Public enterprises should make compensation regulations for installing underground pipelines. They should set up the rules of payment, methods, and how to do. There are no any formal regulations in our legislations Therefore, this legislation should be legislated immediately. According to the result of questionnaire of research analysis, it discovers the general public, the private land of ownerships, public employees, specialists, and scholars and so on. Most of them agree to set up “The right of opposite underground” regarding methods and the amount of money to compensate ownerships. They consider Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) system, bullet trains, and sewers which are all present the form of lines and utilize merely parts of spaces. Moreover they think the sum of compensation should be more preference and acceptability to those ownerships. Meanwhile, the sum of compensation should equal or over the current price which would improve the living quality, to increase the income of ownerships. That would be good for these land ownerships. According to the result of statistic analysis, it compares the methods of compensation and the sum of money of compensation. There is without any difference in the sum of money of compensation for “Lands utilize expense”. That is also meaning the general public, the private land of ownerships, public employees, specialists, and scholars and so on who have the similar opinions for “Lands utilize expense”. Otherwise, there are obviously differences in compensation of “Levy”, “Accord price”, “Rent”, “Public land exchange” , “government securities compensation”, and “ The right of opposite underground”. To sum up, most of interview objects all hope public enterprises can set up the regulation of compensation for methods and sum of money to protect the right of ownerships. Finally, this research puts forward the suggestions on the result of study, for our public enterprise and government to set up some formal legislations.