民法第1113條準用第1101條第2項所規定監護人應經法院許可之行為，具有 相當之實務重要性。本文首先介紹日本民法第859條之3監護人代為處分「居住用 不動產」須經裁判所許可之立法背景以及制度運用現況。其次則探討我國新舊法 之差異，釐清新法適用之對象範圍，並以類型化之方法分析「許可監護人代理受 監護宣告人處分不動產」之裁定，發現法院在不同事件採用了相異的三種判斷標 準：一、籌措受監護宣告人的生活費；二、改善護養療治環境；三、增加經濟上 的利益，以決定是否符合「受監護宣告人之利益」。雖法院多以客觀的利益為基 準，然而在某些類型事件卻不免受到親屬意願之左右，此現象可說明我國現行監 護實務仍有親屬監護之特質。

Article 1113 of Taiwan’s Civil Code on the guardianship over ward requests the guardian to acquire court’s permission on disposition of the ward’s real property. Since averagely 400 cases are brought to the court per year, this rule is undoubtedly important in practice. This study firstly introduces the similar provision on disposition of real estate “used for ward's residence” in Japanese law which is considered as the origin of Taiwan’s rule. Secondly, this research analyzes the difference between Taiwan’s old and new rules in order to clarify the definition of “disposition.” Moreover, through examining related legal cases, it is found that courts adopt three various standards to explain “the best interest of the ward”, namely, the necessity of obtaining funds for living expenses for the ward, the improvement in condition of medical treatment or nursing, and lastly, the possibility of increasing economic profit. Although most courts make decision on the objective basis mentioned above, in certain type cases, such as division of inherited property, courts sometimes consider the opinions of the ward’s family as more important than personal and objective interest of the ward. In conclusion, this study shows that the guardianship in Taiwan is still very family-oriented and less socialized as expected in spite of the amendment of Civil Code in 2008.