A Comparative Study of Taiwan Religious Legal System and Japan Religious Corporations Act Registration，Real Property Regulation and Financial System

本研究試圖利用政教關係若干基本準則與宗教團體不同類型行為之間的關係為準繩，衡量臺灣早期與現行宗教相關法令，臺灣《宗教團體法（草案）》以及日本《宗教法人法》中有關「登記制度」、「不動產制度」以及「財產制度」的條文。通過對比分析，尋找臺灣《宗教團體法（草案）》與日本《宗教法人法》異同之處，並據此提出臺灣《宗教團體法（草案）》在未來進一步修訂過程中可以參考之建議。 在理論架構部分中，本研究將對「宗教行為」進行分類。根據「發起主體」將其分為「團體」與「個人」兩大類；根據「行為的作用對象」將其分為「國家政府」、「外部公共對象」、「團體自身」、「團體成員個人」四大類；根據「行為性質」將其分為「核心」與「非核心」兩大類。同時，將「政教分立」、「宗教自由」、「不過分涉入」、「不歧視」、「比例原則」等政教關係基本準則以及一般法令共六個方面與之結合，得到針對不同類型宗教行為所訂立的法條所應當遵循的基本原則。 在核心論述部分中，本研究以上述的標準檢視臺灣早期與現行宗教相關法令，臺灣《宗教團體法（草案）》以及日本《宗教法人法》中有關「登記制度」、「不動產制度」以及「財產制度」三大主題的所有條文內容。由此發現臺灣《宗教團體法（草案）》相較於臺灣早期與現行宗教相關法令有諸多進步之處，但部分條文存在違背政教關係基本準則的風險或可能，另有部分條文缺乏明確性或涉入到其它法令的管轄權限之中。而日本《宗教法人法》則謹守各項政教關係基本準則，善用公告制度進行宗教團體監督，同時不涉入其它法令的管轄權限中。 通過對比、分析和總結，本研究認為臺日作為自由民主地區，其宗教法令總體而言是符合政教關係基本準則的。臺灣《宗教團體法（草案）》給予宗教團體的優惠政策較多，但政府介入監督相較於日本也更多。而日本《宗教法人法》則給予宗教團體更大的自由空間，並利用「公告制度」使利益相關方代替政府對宗教團體實施有效監督。在未來臺灣《宗教團體法（草案）》的修訂中，可以借鑒日本《宗教法人法》，降低整體「立法強度」，同時尋找更為適合的途徑來監督宗教團體，並將與宗教無直接關聯方面的管理或立法權讓渡給其它專門政府機關或法令。上述這些做法或能減少各界對《宗教團體法（草案）》的爭議，使其盡快通過立法並進入實施階段。This study establishes a standard by combining Church-state basic principles with different types of religious behaviors and use them to examine the provisions related to registration, immovable property regulations and property regulations in Taiwan former and current religious laws, Taiwan Religious Organizations Act (Draft) and Japan Religious Corporations Act. By comparison and analysis, the similarity and difference between Taiwan Religious Organizations Act (Draft) and Japan Religious Corporations Act can be found and suggestions for further revision of Taiwan Religious Organizations Act (Draft) can also be made. In the part of theory, the study divided religious behaviors by several ways. By subject, they can be divided into COLLECTIVE and INDIVIDUAL. By object, they can be divided into state or government, public, religious group itself and individual group member. By property, they can be divided into CORE religious behaviors and NON-CORE religious behaviors. If all these types of religious behaviors are combined with several basic church-state relationship principles, the standards for making the religious law can be established. In the core part of this study, these standards will be used to examine the provisions related to registration, immovable property regulations and property regulations in Taiwan former and current religious laws, Taiwan Religious Organizations Act (Draft) and Japan Religious Corporations Act. Then the author finds that compared with Taiwan former and current religious laws, Taiwan Religious Organizations Act (Draft) has made many progress. However, some provisions may have the risk or possibility of violating the basic church-state relationship principles. Moreover, some provisions lack clarity or invade into other laws’ jurisdiction. Meanwhile, Japan Religious Corporations Act strictly comply with the basic church-state relationship principles and take advantage of ANNOUCEMENT regulation to supervise religious groups without invading into other laws’ jurisdiction. The conclusions of this study are as follows. As a modern free and democratic place, both Taiwan and Japan’s religious laws can generally meet with the basic church-state relationship principles. More preferential policies are given to religious groups according to Taiwan Religious Organizations Act (Draft). However, compared to Japan, governments are more involved into the supervision in Taiwan. Japan Religious Corporations Act gives religious groups more freedom and takes advantage of ANNOUCEMENT regulation so that interested parties can get involved into supervising the religious groups more effectively. This study suggests that Taiwan Religious Organizations Act (Draft) could learn from Japan Religious Corporations Act including reducing legislative intensity, looking for better supervising methods, stepping back from these not so involved with religion itself and alienate jurisdiction to specific laws or authorities. All these may help to reduce controversy and speed up the adoption of Taiwan Religious Organizations Act