|Abstract: ||南海資源豐富，且位於太平洋及印度洋兩大洋之交通樞紐位置，致鄰近國家無不想盡任何方式以將南海劃入自己國家之領海範圍內。菲律賓以黃岩島爭議為由將爭議提付仲裁，嗣後並經仲裁庭受理及審理。自南海仲裁案仲裁判斷公布後，國內外之輿論無不放大檢視涉及己國之利益，而我國普遍認為仲裁庭自始不應受理南海仲裁案，縱使受理，亦應通盤考量全部證據，仲裁員除無實際了解太平島之實際狀況外，僅片面採信菲律賓之陳述即作出判斷，故本研究為了解仲裁判斷之推論，以菲律賓提付仲裁之主張及南海仲裁案對於島嶼之認定標準，探究1982年《聯合國海洋法公約》第121條之規範及沿革。 本研究以太平島之史地事實為整理，復以1982年《聯合國海洋法公約》中所建立之島嶼制度進行討論，觀其立法理由及分析島嶼要件之形成及定義。了解島嶼定義後，進一步探討島嶼所能享有之海域權利，以及當國家間遭遇海域權利重疊問題時，島嶼扮演何種角色，其影響力為何，以及各種考量因素。再依1982年《聯合國海洋法公約》第121條之歷史背景及沿革，針對南海仲裁案進行評析，然太平島並非南海仲裁案之爭點，仲裁庭卻於仲裁判斷中進行通盤的解釋，進而於判斷中認定太平島為岩礁，無法享有專屬經濟海域及大陸礁層等權利，該仲裁判斷已嚴重影響我國行使太平島之權利。 太平島之法律地位為何，究為島或礁之議題，主要涉及於自然資源、航行權利及島嶼制度中不確定之概念。在法律層面上，島嶼制度於南海仲裁案中得到明確詮釋，可釐清長久以來極具爭議之島嶼認定問題；於政治層面上，自然資源攸關國家發展及主權之延伸。我國主張南海之歷史性權利，南海資源與島礁主權暨法律地位對我國無論在法律上、政治上均有相當之意義，而中國亦以歷史性權利主張主權存在，南海仲裁案公布後，中國與菲律賓及其他周邊國家對於南海仲裁案之態度及情事，將影響整個東亞地區之穩定性，本研究透過美、菲、中等國對於南海仲裁案之反應及衝擊，提出我國於太平島上經略實踐之建議。|
The South China Sea is rich in resources and located in the transportation hubs between the Pacific Ocean and the Indian Ocean. The neighboring countries all want to transfer the South China Sea into the territorial sea of their country. Philippines submitted the dispute to arbitration on the grounds of the Huang-yan Island, and it was accepted and heard by the arbitral tribunal. Since the arbitration judgment of the South China Sea Arbitration Case was announced, public opinions have been magnified to examine the interests of the country, and Taiwan generally believes that the arbitration tribunal should not accept the South China Sea arbitration case from the beginning. Even it is accepted, all evidences should be considered. Except that there is no actual understanding of the actual conditions of Taiping Island, the judgment is judged only by adopting one-sided statement of Philippines. Therefore, for understanding the deduction of arbitration judgment, this study resaerch Philippines’ claims and the South China Sea Arbitration Case's criteria for determining the island to know The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea （UNCLOS）, Article 121 of the norms and history. This study is based on the historical facts of Taiping Island, and discussed with the regime of islands established in the 1982 "United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea", to observed its legislative reasons and analyzed the formation and definition of the island elements. After understanding the definition of islands, we will further explore the island’s rights to the seas and the island’s role, its influence, and various factors when it comes to the overlapping of maritime rights between countries. In accordance with the historical background and history of Article 121 of the 1982 UNCLOS, the South China Sea arbitration case was reviewed. However, Taiping Island is not a dispute point in the South China Sea arbitration case. The arbitral tribunal made a comprehensive interpretation in the arbitration judgment. In the judgment, Taiping Island was identified as a rock reef and could not enjoy the rights of exclusive economic sea areas and continental reefs. This arbitration judgment has seriously affected Taiwan’s right to exercise Taiping Island. What is the legal status of Taiping Island ? It mainly involves the concept of uncertainty in natural resources, navigational rights and island regime . On the legal level, the regime of islands has been clearly explained in the South China Sea arbitration case, which can clarify the issue of island controversy that has been controversial for a long time. On the political level, natural resources are related to the development of the country and the extension of sovereignty. Taiwan advocates the historical rights of the South China Sea. The sovereignty and legal status of the South China Sea resources and islands and reefs are of considerable legal and political significance to Taiwan. China also claims sovereignty with historic rights. After the South China Sea arbitration case was announced, The attitudes and circumstances with China, Philippines and other neighboring countries regarding the South China Sea arbitration case will affect the stability of the East Asia region. This study puts forward Taiwan’s practice on Taiping Island through the reaction and impact of the United States, the Philippines, and China on the South China Sea arbitration case.