• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.17 no.2
• /
• pp.3-28
• /
• 2016

While product liability has been settled as a technical term in civil law, criminal law does not commonly accept technical term for it. Not like civil law, product liability in criminal law point outs individual responsibility and disability of normative order. Meaning that causation between individual's action of violation of duty and the result of danger of legal interest or infringement of legal interest must be proved. In criminal law excluding "non-result-constituted crimes (Unternehmensdelikt)", charge of injuring, accidental infliction of injury, homicide or involuntary manslaughter is problematic in product liability. Of course, it is necessary to distinguish whether the action related to the outcome is act or ommission. Also the causal relationship between the action and the result must be proved, and the intention or negligence should be recognized. In this paper, it analyzes cases that were problematic in Korea, Germany, Spain, etc. Mainly focusing on the problems revealed in the determination of causal relationship, especially recognizing criminal liability related to products. Furthermore it is followed by the view of reviewing the cause-and-effect relationship by 2 steps, dividing natural scientific causation and the normative causal relationship. In this process, to acknowledge criminal product liability in accordance with recognizing cause-and-effect relationship, there should be general risk of specific substance causing the outcome. This only premise can be meaningful to examine the casual relationship from specific cases. As it shows in some cases and theories, it is not contradicting general law of cause and effect by determining specific causal relationship by free evaluation of evidence if a general causal relationship does not exist. Also since judge's testimony does not hold a dominant position from rule of thumb, it is possible to recognize specific causal relationship. However this paper takes position that if there is no objective and reasonably undeniable cause and effect law. If there is no objective and reasonably undeniable causal law, which is the premise for recognizing concrete causal relations, judge should sentence guilty according to "in dubio pro reo" principle. In addition, it is not allowed for the defendant to burden unproven fact by free evaluation of evidence which has an effect of shift of burden of proof.

• Journal of the Korean Ceramic Society
• /
• v.36 no.2
• /
• pp.186-192
• /
• 1999

Dang-Chin feldspar powder with the mean particle size of 9.1 $\mu\textrm{m}$ was added to the synthesized mullite powder with the particle size of +325∼-200 mesh and the powder compact was prepared by PLPP(pressureless powder packing method). Densification behaviors were observed in sintering temperature range of 1200∼1400$^{\circ}C$. The binder solution of 4% PVA was infilterated into packed powder to the suitable strength. The PLPP method makes it possible to form compacts without clay as plasticizer. Therfore there was no defect caused by phase transition after sintering. Additionally, we observed the dense microstructure by the melting of feldspar. When the mullite compacts with feldspar of 30% were sintered at 1300$^{\circ}C$-4 hrs, we obtained the dense microstructure with zero water absorption and porosity <1%. When these compacts were sintered longer than 4 hrs at 1300$^{\circ}C$ or higher than 1400$^{\circ}C$, the examggerated grain growth of mullite was observed.