土地法第68條的賠償範圍事關因登記錯誤、遺漏或虛偽致受損害者得向地政機關請求賠償的數額，甚具重要性。本研究第貳部分探討賠償範圍的基礎理論；第參部分釐清該規定限制賠償範圍之目的或功能；第肆部分討論該規定與國家賠償法的關係；第伍部分與第陸部分深入分析該規定賠償範圍的爭議問題。本研究從解釋論的角度探討，並將我國法與澳洲法、英格蘭法相比較。本研究認為，登記人員如有故意或過失，就超過該條規定賠償範圍的部分，受害人得依國家賠償法第2條第2項請求賠償。土地法第68條的賠償範圍包含所失利益。該條第2項雖規定「不得超過受損害時之價值」，但僅係指不得超過受損時不動產登記權利的價值。原登記為抵押權之人得於其得以優先受償的數額範圍內，得請求賠償借款人未支付的利息。

The scope of compensation due for registration in Article 68 of the Land Act is with great importance since it concerns the amounts of compensation with which the injured person is able to claim from the land office due to error, omission, or fraud in registration. Part Ⅱ of this study explores the fundamental theory of the scope of compensation; and Part Ⅲ clarifies the purpose or function of the limited scope of compensation of the Article, Part Ⅳ discusses the relationship between the Article and the State Compensation Act; and Part V and Ⅵ substantially analyzes the disputed issues of the scope of compensation in the Article. This study further explores this provision from the perspective of interpretation and compares Taiwanese law with Australian law and English law. This study holds that the injured person is able to claim compensation beyond the scope of the Article in accordance with the second paragraph of Article 2 of the State Compensation Act when the registration officer acts with intent or negligence. The compensation scope of Article 68 of the Land Act includes lost interests. Although the second paragraph of the Article states that “not exceeding the value at the time of damage”, it only points out the compensation does not exceed the value of the right registered over the real estate at the time of damage. The person originally registered as a mortgagee is able to claim compensation for overdue interest arose from the borrower in the scope of the amounts as the person may receive satisfaction preferentially.