古蹟在我國文化資產保存中，屬於爭議最多的文化資產種類，主要的原因在於古蹟 的指定影響古蹟所有權人的財產權益甚鉅。除此之外，在我國《文化資產保存法》亦規 範有行政罰與行政刑法之罰則，對於古蹟所有人、使用人或管理人課予之法律責任不可 謂不重。基此，古蹟的指定是相當嚴肅的一件事情，除了指定程序須合於正當程序外， 對於古蹟定義範圍的界定必須明確、清楚。因為古蹟定義範圍清楚明確，對於古蹟保存 標的之界定方能正確，古蹟所有權人的財產權益方能避免發生過當的侵害；另一方面， 明確的古蹟範圍界定，有助於法律責任的釐清。因此文化資產保存法的古蹟定義，雖然 僅是一條文中的一款，卻是意義重大。筆者期待藉由本文的探討，有助於古蹟定義範圍 的釐清，進而落實文化資產保存的工作。

Among the many disputes concerning preservation of our nation’s various cultural heritages, the monument category is the most controversial. That is because the property owner’s rights may be seriously affected or even damaged if his/her property were to be designated as a national monument by governmental due process. Furthermore, our Cultural Heritage Preservation Act (CHPA) stipulates that any offender shall be penalized by administrative penalties or by administrative criminal law. Therefore, the designation of any property as a monument is a serious matter to the property owner. Not only should the designating procedure be justifiable and transparently through a due process, but the definition of “what is a monument and its necessary accommodation area” must be both specific and crystal clear. Only the monument area definition is specific and crystal clear that the preservation sphere could be precisely divided and the rights of the owner are well-guarded and unlawful deeds avoided. Although the Cultural Heritage Preservation Act only defines “monument” in one of its provisions, its implication is significant. The author hopes that, through this research, the current ambiguity in the monument definition could be clarified and the task to preserve our precious cultural heritages be improved.