| 摘要: | 財產權是人民的基本權利，憲法第15條「人民之……財產權，應予保障」。但是，對於如何保障財產權，法規並沒有明文規定。大法官會議釋字第400號解釋：「憲法第15條關於人民財產權應予保障之規定，旨在確保個人依財產之存續狀態行使其自由使用、收益及處分之權能，並免於遭受公權力或第三人之侵害，俾能實現個人自由、發展人格及維護尊嚴。」
財產權之保障，必須落實於實定法中，方能達到保障之目的。本文即欲透過案例研究，期能分析出問題點，對問題點經比較分析後，篩選出議題、課題，經《都市更新條例》及相關法規適法性分析，並運用法學方法論、文獻分析法等方法，以提出保障權利人財產權之對策等研究目的。
為達成研究目的，本論文區分五章十九節，研究內容從權利人財產權保障觀點出發，研究權利變換的內容、案例分析等，對實施都市更新過程中，所可能面臨之問題與困境，嘗試提出解決之方式。
權利變換的問題與困境之一，是《都市更新條例》及其相關法規，在實務上讓實施者有很大的運作空間，在過程中，相關權利人僅有同意或不同意為其唯一權利，造成相關權利人與實施者間「公共信任」不足，且致都市更新成效十分有限；二是同意書的格式目前為權利人單方向實施者簽署，權利人在重要的財產變動應以契約書雙方簽訂為宜，且相關權利人簽署同意書後，因前述理由其財產權相對被剝奪；三是資訊不對稱與公共信任不足的困境，致開發商整合困難，而權利人財產權也未獲充分保障。
在現行《都市更新條例》及其相關法規不做重大修改情況下，公部門應有配套措施以健全市場公平交易，應建立同意書揭露權利義務相關資訊(或是同意書改為契約書)、縮小資訊不對稱差距以增進公共信任，及建立權利人立足點的平等等，以建構保障權利人財產權之目的。
Property right is the basic right of the people. Article 15 of the Constitution indicates that “…… property right of the people should be guaranteed.” However, laws and regulations do not expressly provide how to protect property right. The Council of Grand Justices delivered Constitutional Interpretation no.400, and it explains that Article 15 of the Constitution, the provision which is about that property right of the people, is established to ensure people to freely handle their own property so that it can protect people from getting harmed by others. And then people can fulfill individual liberty, develop personality and defend dignity.
The protection of property right must be implemented in statutory law so as to achieve purpose of protection. This text will research the cases to analyze the critical points, and then sift the issues. By analyzing the validity of the “Urban Renewed Act” and other relevant regulations, and using legal methodology and literature analysis method to bring up the research purpose about protection of property right of the obligees.
To achieve the research goal, this thesis is divided into 5:19. It starts from the perspective of protection of property right of the obligees, and discusses the content of rights transformation and analyzes the cases. And then, it concludes with proposing solutions to the problems and difficulties which we may be confronted with when implementing urban renewal.
One of the difficulties in right transformation is that “Urban Renewal Act” and the relevant regulations make the executors have a large range to work in practice. In the process, obligees are only able to agree or disagree. This makes obligees and the executors are lack of “public trust” between each other, and also makes urban renewal insufficient. Furthermore, now only obligees sign the agreement to executor. However, both obligees and executors should sign the important agreement to property changes; otherwise, property right of the obligees would be relatively deprived for the foregoing reason. Moreover, asymmetric information and the lack of public trust make developers hard to integrate, and property right of the obligees does not get sufficiently protected.
Under the circumstances that current “Urban Renewal Act” and relevant regulations are without great modification, the public sector should have supplementary measures to integrate fair trade in the market, and should establish agreement to reveal the information related to right and obligation, reduce asymmetric information to improve public trust, and build up the equality of obligees, so as to protect property right of obligees. |
