The Measures for the Registration of Lease of Farm Land are formulated pursuant to Paragraph 2 of Article 6 of the Act Governing Reduction of Farm Rent to 37.5 Percent.　Article 6, Paragraph 2, Subparagraph 3, of said Measures provides that a lessor who, per Article 17, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 3, of said Act, applies to register the termination of lease, shall complete an application form and submit the lease, notice of rent in default, notice of termination of lease due to rent in default, and verification of delivery, or evidence of settlement through mediation or conciliation by the commission for lease of farm lands, or a final court judgment.　The foregoing is a supplemental provision issued by the regulatory authority pursuant to authorizations granted by the law regarding details and minor technical issues concerning documents that the applicant should prepare, and is not prohibited under the Constitution.　Article 1 of said Act provides: “Lease of farm land shall conform to this Act.　Matters not provided for in this Act shall be governed by the Land Act and other laws”.　The provision of Paragraph 1 of Article 440 of the Civil Code, which provides that in case of default in respect of payment of rent, the lessor may fix a reasonable period and notify the lessee to make payment, should also apply in the case where the lessor terminates the lease per Article 17, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 3, of said Act.　The above provision, requiring the notice of collection of rent in default and so forth, Article 6, Paragraph 2, Subparagraph 3, of said Act, neither exceeds the scope of authorization of the law nor imposes additional restriction that does not exist under the law, and does not contradict the Constitution.

　　The petitioner in this case petitioned for interpretation of Article 6 of the Act Governing Reduction of Farm Rent to 37.5 Percent as amended in 1983 which provides that: “After this Act takes effect, the lease of farm land shall be made in writing.　The lessor together with the lessee shall apply to register the execution, amendment, termination or renewal of the lease.” “The Measures for Registration referred to in the preceding Paragraph shall be prescribed by the provincial (city) government to be submitted to the Executive Yuan for approval.”　The Measures for the Registration of Lease of Farm Land effective at the time were prescribed pursuant to the aforesaid authorization.　Article 6, Paragraph 3, Subparagraph 3, of said Measures provides that a lessor who, per Article 17, Paragraph1, Subparagraph 3, of said Act, applies to register the termination of lease, shall complete an application form and submit the lease, notice of rent in default, notice of termination of lease due to rent in default, and verification of delivery, or evidence of settlement through mediation or conciliation by the commission for lease of farm lands, or a final court judgment.　The foregoing is a supplemental provision issued by the regulatory authority pursuant to authorizations granted by the law regarding details and minor technical issues concerning documents that the applicant should prepare, and is not prohibited under the Constitution. (See Judicial Yuan Interpretations Nos. 367, 443 and 547)

　　Article 1 of the Act Governing Reduction of Farm Rent to 37.5 Percent provides: “Lease of farm land shall conform to this Act.　Matters not provided for in this Act shall be governed by the Land Act and other laws”.　The “other laws” in the foregoing include the provisions of the Civil Code regarding Lease. Paragraph 1 of Article 440 of the Civil Code provides that in case of default in respect of payment of rent, the lessor may fix a reasonable period and notify the lessee to make payment, and if the lessee does not pay within such period, the lessor may terminate the lease.　That is, the lessor will not have the right to terminate the lease until the lessor fixes a reasonable period and notifies the lessee to make payment.　The legislative purpose of the foregoing is to protect the lessee, and the aforesaid provision should also apply in the case where the lessor terminates the lease per Article 17, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 3, of the Act Governing Reduction of Farm Rent to 37.5 Percent.　The Supreme Court, in accordance with the aforesaid legislative purpose, has rendered the precedent judgment Ref. No. (45)-Tai-Shang-205.　Accordingly, Article 6, Paragraph 2, Subparagraph 3, of said Measures conforms to the purpose of Articles 1 and 17 of said Act and Article 440 of the Civil Code, does not prescribe additional restriction that does exist under the law, and does not contradict the Constitution.

　　The Petitioner questioned whether the Supreme Administrative Court Judgment Ref. No. (89)-Judgment-2754 applying Articles 2, 4 and 5 of the aforesaid Measures contradicted the Constitution. Investigation indicates that the foregoing disputed whether the court made the right decision and applied the appropriate laws, but did not make any specific allegation on where and how, if at all, the ordinances applied in the final court judgment contradicted the Constitution.　This contravenes Article 5, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 2, of the Constitutional Interpretation Procedure Act.　Pursuant to Paragraph 3 of said Article, the petition should be dismissed.　This is hereby also clarified.