本文之寫作啟發自最高法院104年度台上字第2480號民事判決，本案之案例事實並不複雜，為一般的請求拆除越界建築事件，然而原告請求返還的土地為面積極小的畸零地，故被告提出權利濫用之抗辯。由於權利濫用係概括條款，因此，在法律評價上應如何利益衡量、如何具體判斷公共利益之歸屬等，有待法院予以具體化。然而自二審起，各審級法院對應審酌事項容有不同見解，故迭經上訴最高法院後發回，迄今仍繫屬高等法院更審中。觀察本案往返二、三審之過程，不難窺知權利濫用之具體化，以及如何操作、審認利益衡量之基準，確實具有一定難度，故本文嘗試以比較法之方式，從德國、日本法制暨學說面出發，輔以評析我國實務判決之運作模式，期以覓尋利益衡量之具體操作方法，並彙整歷來判決予以類型化，以檢視法院對於公共利益審認時之參酌因素，企盼能提供實務審認利益衡量時之具體參考基準。

This article is inspired by a Supreme Court’s civil case. The case is about claiming the properties occupied by adjacent buildings, which seems to be normal. However, in this case, the properties claimed are composed of several pieces of deformed lands. Those lands have only small land areas and twisted shapes that are impossible for building or any kind of use. Also, the value is very cheap since the lands are deformed. As a result, the defendant proposed that the plaintiff’s claim is an abuse of right, which shouldn’t be granted according to section 148 of the Civil Code. As the courts held different opinions about which element should be considered in judging the balance of interests on abuse of rights since the second instance, this case was appealed and remanded several times by the Supreme Court. Observing the different opinions of the courts, we found that the method to specify the doctrine of abuse of right is worth exploring, especially the balance of interests since this case is related to public interests. According to the precedence of the Supreme Court, reviewing the balance between private interests and public interests is a method to judge the cases involved in the abuse of rights. In this case, the claim of the plaintiff not only involve in the existence of the defendants’houses but also the public interests of keeping high-value buildings instead of tearing them down to useless scattered lands. Therefore, this article starts with the comparative law of German and Japan, which had been developing the doctrine for over a century. Then, observe the operation of reviewing the balance between public and private interests in Taiwan’s courts. Throughout those researches, we try to figure out the elements considered by the courts when it comes to the balance of interests in the cases related to public interests.