Study On The Construction Of Multi Rights In One Thing In Air Space

The construction of low altitude public route of Chinese UAV has entered the pilot operation stage,and the exclusive route and airspace network of low altitude UAV has been gradually established under the 150 meter true high level.However,state overall construction of low altitude route airspace lacks sufficient institutional support at the legal level.The current law has not clearly recognized the national ownership of airspace,but the state essentially plays the role of owner in the management and use of airspace.Demonstrating the ownership of airspace and putting forward specific structures for one thing and multiple rights in airspace will help to provide solid institutional support for the construction of public routes for national low altitude UAVs.Since airspace has become a natural resource（after the emergence of aircraft that actively use air）,the land ownership right space advocated by traditional property law has been continuously restricted from high altitude to low altitude,and a certain right space range（500ft.）has been reserved for the land owner.For this reason,some aviation law scholars have a wrong understanding in the study of airspace: 500ft（United States）or 150 m true height（China）and other accessible aviation domain bottom height is regarded as the legal right space boundary between land ownership（aboveground space ownership）and airspace ownership.Therefore,demonstrating the issue of space ownership will help to clarify the misunderstandings existing in the existing research,so as to promote the in-depth study of airspace issues and even other aviation law issues.Therefore,when analyzing the ownership of air space with the principle of one thing,one right upheld by the traditional property law theory,the universality of the theory of one thing,one right will be questioned: observing the intertwined rights of collective land aboveground space ownership and national airspace ownership with the traditional property law theory will generate the paradox of the coexistence of two complete ownership on the same object,Thus,the principle and function of real right upheld by the traditional real right theory are challenged.Therefore,we should reflect on the traditional theory of real right,break the intuition prison that real right is wrongly equivalent at the level of objective law and subjective consciousness,completely liberate the real right in the legal sense from the physical attribute of the object,and return to the purity of the objectification of its subjective consciousness.On this basis,it is further pointed out that the protection power derived from the law is directly affected by the desire for the protection of rights,and presents the characteristics of dual differentiation within the scope of the consciousness of claim.Finally,by recognizing the of the theory of property law on the air space,this paper makes a reasonable interpretation of the coexistence of ownership contrary to the principles of traditional property law.