光華寮案原為屋主要求房客遷出的民事訴訟，但因屋主為當時代表中國這個國家的「中華民國政府」，而在京都地方法院一審訴訟進行期間，發生日本轉變對中國這個國家的政府承認，使得光華寮訴訟的爭點成為實際上未被消滅的「中華民國政府」，是否因政府承認的更換，而在法律上完全消滅？此點成為涉及複雜國際法理論的判例，從而引起許多國際法學者的廣泛討論。過去的判決認為，「中華民國」存在的客觀事實並無絲毫變化，且許多案例顯示「未被承認國家」或「被取消承認的政府」也可擁有做為原告的提訴權，故都承認「中華民國」做為原告的資格，且採取有別於傳統國際法的理論，而傾向於「不完全的政府繼承說」，將光華寮的所有權判給「中華民國」，使「中華民國」在日本國內擁有國有財產。但依據此次日本最高法院的判決，這起訴訟的原告應為中國這個國家，而其代表者已變更為「中華人民共和國」，故在1972年9月27日即應停止訴訟，因而將該案駁回京都地方法院更審。本文將針對本案所涉及的國際法理論，按照各個層次分析，並簡單介紹其判決要旨，探討光華寮案判決的問題。

The Khoka-Ryo case was originally a civil lawsuit filed by the landlord requesting tenants to move out, and the plaintiff of the case was "Republic of China" which represented China at that time. However, while the legal procedure of the first trial held by Kyoto district court was ongoing, Japan shifted its recognition of China's government from "Republic of China" (R.O.C.) to "People's Republic of China" (P.R.C.). Therefore the central controversy lies in the Khoka-Ryo case has become the following: Whether the practically existent "R.O.C." has been legally extinguished because of Japan's recognition shift of China's government? This question involved complicated theoretical issues of International Law, thus triggered comprehensive discussions among scholars of this field. Those past rulings on this case considered the fact of the existence of "R.O.C" was literally unchanged, let alone many precedents also indicate that "unrecognized countries" or "unrecognized governments" are able to be plaintiffs who possess the right to litigation. Thus those rulings admitted "R.O.C" was qualified to be a plaintiff, and instead of adopting conventional theories on International Law, the theory of "incomplete succession of governments" was taken to decide that Khoka-Ryo was belonged to "R.O.C", and "R.O.C" was able to possess national properties within Japan. Nevertheless, according to the latest ruling made by the Highest Court of Japan, the plaintiff of this case should be China, of which the recognized representative ought to be "P.R.C". Based on the Highest Court's decision, the whole legal procedure should have been ceased from 27 September of 1972, hence the case was returned to Kyoto district court for another trial. This article is aimed at analyzing relevant theories on International Law at different levels, and gives a brief introduction on the rulings aforementioned, in order to explore the issues involved in Khoka-Ryo case.