非婚生子女之法律地位：以繼承權為中心

Abstract

近年來，全球許多國家面臨少子化問題。有學者指出，單身生育、同居生育等現象越來越多，重視生育行為者的多元化傾向與並對婚外生育採取較為寬容的政策，有助於提高整體生育率水準 。 相較於歐洲各國，我國的婚外生育比例十分低，日本的婚外生育比例則較我國更低。有研究者發現，懷孕是促使台日兩國女性進入婚姻的推力之一，婚前懷孕的女性若要生育會選擇結婚，除了傳統的婚育價值與文化規範，也可能是受到法律上對非婚生子女保障不足的影響 。 自1989年聯合國通過《兒童權利公約》以來，「兒童的最大利益 」即成為各國相關法律制定時重要的指導原則。我國民法親屬編近年來歷經多次修正，亦反覆強調「子女最佳利益」之重要性。如此，在法規修正之後，前述社會學之研究指責「法律上對非婚生子女保障不足」造成我國婚姻外子女比例顯著低落，究竟是否仍具備正當性或說服力？我國的法律對非婚生子女，究竟是否「保障不足」？係本研究所欲探討之問題。 非婚生子女在法律上之地位，與婚生子女最大的差異，在於與生父建立法律上親子關係的方式不同。婚生子女僅依出生之事實，依據民法第1063條第1項自動受婚生推定，此推定同時也是父性推定，便與生母之夫發生親子關係，此無關乎與生母之夫之意願。至於非婚生子女，則不受婚生推定，而必須經認領或準正之法律行為，始得與生父建立親子關係，因此，若生父不願為此行為，或者生父已死亡，無法為此行為，則非婚生子女如何與生父發生親子關係，即成問題。 在生父不願認領之情形下，非婚生子得提起強制認領之訴，然而，過去民法對起訴期間以及事由，均有一定之限制，非婚生子女欲透過訴訟解決，未必容易（詳待後述）。此外，在2007年民法修正前，法律僅承認生父生前之認領，導致生父死後，非婚生子女無從被認領。修法後，民法第1067條增設第2項規定：「前項認領之訴，於生父死亡後，得向生父之繼承人為之。生父無繼承人者，得向社會福利主管機關為之。」看似解決了問題，然而，民法第1069條復規定：「非婚生子女認領之效力，溯及於出生時。但第三人已得之權利，不因此而受影響。」如此一來，死後受認領之子女得否繼承生父之遺產，即產生疑問。換言之，若非婚生子女因認領之溯及效力自出生時與生父發生親子關係，並因而溯及於生父死亡時成為生父之繼承人，第三人因而喪失繼承人身分或應繼分減少，是否該當於「因認領之溯及效力使第三人已得之權利受影響」？若採取肯定之見解，則在生父有其他繼承人存在之情形，死後受認領之子女將因本條規定無法繼承。若然，雖非婚生子女在生父死亡後「理論上」得被認領，但實益甚低。 近來，日本有關非婚生子女繼承權的問題亦成為各方討論的焦點。其爭點在於，日本民法第900條第4款但書規定，（受認領之）非婚生子女之應繼分僅有婚生子女二分之一是否違反日本國憲法第14條第1項法律之下人人平等之的原則。1995年日本最高法院作成合憲裁定後，此爭議一度沈寂，但隨著近年來國內來國內外情勢的變化，下級審陸續出現違憲判斷。2013年9月4日，最高法院一改過去之見解，宣告民法第900條第4款但書違憲失效。 綜上所述，日本與台灣之狀況雖不盡相同，但在現行法下，兩國之非婚生子女即使克服種種困難，獲得生父之認領，但在親子關係之效果亦即繼承上，仍與婚生子女有差別待遇。基於我國與日本人口構造（非婚生子女佔總出生數比例）之相似性，本文透過比較法之方式考查非婚生子女之繼承權問題，並就現行法制提出具體的解釋論及修法建議。

Due to the low birth rate nowadays, the protection of illegitimate children gains more and more attention. On May 23, 2007, Taiwan’s Civil Code Part VI (Family Law) was amended and Article 1067 started to allow the child born out of wedlock to claim affiliation to the putative father even after the death of the father. However, Article 1069 provides that “the effect of affiliation to a child born out of wedlock is retroactive as from the time of birth, but the existing rights of the third parties will not be affected thereby.” Therefore, whether a child being acknowledged after his putative father’s death has right to inheritance becomes a question, and there is no clear answer in the Civil Code. Regarding whether Article 1069 a limitation on inheritance, the Supreme Court has not made a clear judgment until 2011. The determination held that, in principle, an illegitimate child acknowledged after his father’s death has no right to inheritance. The reason is that succession has already opened with the death of the deceased. Although the affiliation has a retroactive effect, the property right that other heirs acquired will not be influenced. However, if part of estate is possessed by an unauthorized person when succession opening, the child acknowledged after the deceased’s death can still claim his right to estate on that part. Scholars in Taiwan have not reached consensus on this problem. Some argue that the other heirs have already acquired the estate and therefore the rights should not be affected. On the other hand, some claim that the other heirs are not “the third parties” in Article 1069 according to legislative record, and still others claim that we should perform another revise to solve this problem. In Japan, Article 784 of Civil Code is similar to Article 1069 in Taiwan. However, most Japanese scholars claim that “the third parties” does not include the other heirs. The reason is that Article 910 provides ” In the case where a person who becomes an heir through affiliation after the commencement of inheritance intends to apply for a division of the inherited property, if other heirs have already divided the inherited property or made another disposition, he/she shall only have a claim of payment for value.” Although the situation in Japan and in Taiwan is not exactly the same, as result, illegitimate children cannot acquire estate or obtain less estate than legitimate children after affiliation. Is this discrimination difference still reasonable in today's society? On account of the similarity of population structure (the proportion of illegitimate children) and legal effect in these two countries, this research attempts to analyze illegitimate child’s right to inheritance by comparative legal studies and make suggestion on interpretation. This study is predicted to help to form stable policy on marriage and children. Besides, this research will use Japanese law for as comparative method, therefore it may promote the intercommunication between Taiwan and Japan.