公寓大廈公共基金之定性、範圍與歸屬──從臺灣高等法院108年度上易字第847號民事判決出發

The Nature, Scope, and Ownership of the Common Fund of Condominium ─From the Civil Judgment of Taiwan High Court Shang Yi Zi No. 847 in 2019

根據公寓大廈管理條例第10條第2項與第11條之規定，公寓大廈共用部分（包含約定共用部分）與其相關設施之一般或重大修繕、管理、維護、拆除或改良等行為所生之費用，係以公共基金為重要之支應來源，顯見公共基金為公寓大廈維護發展不可或缺之重要資產。然而，各界目前對於公共基金之性質與範圍、其與管理費等費用之關係、及公共基金之權利歸屬等根本性之問題見解不一或不清，可能導致公寓大廈管理條例相關規定於解讀與運用時出現爭議。有鑑於臺灣高等法院108年度上易字第847號民事判決為近年法院判決中就公共基金與管理費等概念進行較多詮釋者，本文欲特別從本案判決之意見提取關於公共基金定性、範圍及歸屬等值得思考之問題，藉由對國內實務與學說文獻之觀察與分析，傾向採取包含說而主張公共基金包含俗稱之管理費，且屬於全體區分所有權人之公同共有財產，較符合現行公寓大廈管理條例之體系與規定。基於前揭立場，本文進一步就包含說於公寓大廈管理條例待解決之問題，以及公共基金作為全體區分所有權人之公同共有財產所衍生之疑慮進行反省與檢討，並且提出可供參考之立法建議。

The common fund is unquestionably an important source for the expenses of the reparation, management, maintenance, dismantlement, or improvement of shared areas (including designated shared areas) of condominium according to Article 10 Paragraph 2 and Article 11 of Condominium Administration Act. Courts, government officials, and scholars in Taiwan, however, hold different viewpoints or have a rather vague idea of fundamental issues of the common fund, such as the nature and scope of the common fund, the relation between the common fund and management fees, and the ownership of the common fund, which may lead to a misreading or a misapplication of the related provisions of Condominium Administration Act. This article will initiate the study of the issues of the common fund by introducing the Civil Judgment of Taiwan High Court Shang Yi Zi No. 847 in 2019 since the case provided a rather deeper discussion on the idea of the common fund and management fees in recent years. Following the introduction of the case, the article will extract the issues on the nature, scope, and ownership of the common fund which are worthy of being discussed from the case. The article, after the thorough observation and analysis of the judicial, administrative and academic references in Taiwan, tends to advocate that the so-called management fee is in the concept of common fund, and that the common fund is owned by all the unit owners in common. Based on the aforementioned standpoint, the article will further examine and criticize the potential problems of inclusion theory and the own-in-common nature of the common fund. The article will also try to provide some related legislative suggestions with reference value.