• 의료법학
• /
• 제11권1호
• /
• pp.397-445
• /
• 2010

This thesis introduces the trends of korean courts' ruling on damages in medical malpractice cases for past 10 years. First of all, Korean courts' ruling have had a tendency to pay only non-economic damages for not taking the informed consent. If a doctor cannot get the informed consent from a patient, he compensate only non-economic damages for the infringement of self-determination rights of patient. It's enough for the plaintiff to prove the infringement of self-determination rights, if the plaintiff just want to get non-economic damages. The Korean Supreme court have ruled that if plaintiffs want to get economic damages for the infringement of self-determination rights or informed consent, plaintiffs must prove that the infringement of self-determination rights is the proximate cause of the economic damages of patient. There is another tendency for the Korean Supreme court to limit the damages in medical malpractice cases on the ground of patient's diseases' dangerousness or patient's idiosyncrasy. In the past courts often limit the damages only to 70~80% of total damages, but now a days courts mostly limit the damages to 20~30%. This thesis also introduce the Korean courts' trends about Valuing damages in personal injury actions awarded for gratuitously rendered nursing and medical care.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제9권1호
• /
• pp.9-56
• /
• 2008

The medical practice does not always get a satisfatory result since the disease progress of patients are depended on patients' physical constitution and the doctors cannot control the outcomes about patients' physiological and biological reaction after the treatment. Moreover, the medical practice may bring wrong result fatalistically because of the unpredictablility of life. To demand for compensation of the damage to the doctors about these wrong result, the patient side holds the burden of proof that is between medical practice and demage, and there is damage from doctor's malpractice according to the accepted theory about the fundamental principle of distribution of the burden of proof. This falls not only under the liability of Tort Law, but also liability of Contract Law. However, the patient may be in difficult situation to prove the malpractice of doctors since he or she cannot recognize the facts because he or she was in unconscious while the medical practice was conducted, or they cannot judge precisely even though they recognize the facts. Nevertheless, the lawsuits against medical malpractice are the field that never achieves the equality of arms since the most of the evidence belong to the doctor's side. Hence, to maintain the principle of the equality of arms under the constitution, the theory leads to alleviate the burden of proof that patients hold. However, the doctors cannot be asked for the burden of proof that they conduct medical practice without errors. Because the doctors may experience difficulty to prove their innocence as the patients because of the unique characteristic that medical practices have. Therefore, the methods of the alleviation of the patient's burden of proof should have the equality of arms and the equal opportunity between the patients and the doctors with the evaluation of the justifiable interest from both the patients and the doctors. As the methods of the alleviation of the burden of proof, the alleviation of the demands and the degree of the burden of proof or resolutely the conversion of the burden may be considered. However, Recognizing the exception from general principle with converting the burden of proof is not proper in principle because the doctors may experience difficulty of the proof as the patients may have. If the difficulty of proof can be resolved by alleviating of the demands and the degree of the burden of proof, it is more desirable resolution rather than converting the burden of proof.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제18권2호
• /
• pp.3-46
• /
• 2017

의사의 설명의무는 의사가 환자에게 이미 시행한 의료행위, 시행 중인 의료행위 및 장래에 시행할 의료행위와 환자의 요양상 수칙에 관하여 적극적 체계적으로 진술함으로써 환자가 그 내용을 인식하게 할 법적 의무를 총칭한다. 이 의무는 환자의 알 권리에 대응하는 보고성 설명의무, 환자의 동의권 거절권에 대응하는 기여성 설명의무, 요양지도성 설명의무로 나뉜다. 설명의무를 분류하는 것은 각각의 기능과 법적 성질이 다르고, 법적 성질이 다름에 따라 그 위반 시의 효과, 특히 손해배상책임의 대상과 범위가 달라지기 때문이다. 이 주제에 관하여 우리나라에서는 지난 40년 가까운 기간 동안 많은 이론의 발전이 있었고, 그를 토대로 대법원 판결의 논리도 상당히 정치하게 전개되어 왔다. 그러나 여전히 학계와 실무계 일각에서는 용어와 개념의 혼동, 학설과 판례 논리에 대한 이해 부족을 목격하게 되고, 심지어 대법원 판결문 내의 전후 문맥에서 그리고 관련 있는 복수의 판례 사이에서 논리와 이론의 불일치를 발견하게 되는 것이 사실이다(이것은 합리적 근거와 설득력을 지닌 견해의 분립을 지적하는 것이 아니다). 위와 같은 견해와 문제의식을 기초로 해서, 의사가 부담하는 설명의무의 기능별 분류와 법적 성질 및 그 위반 시의 효과를 우리나라 학설과 판례를 중심으로 분석 정리한다.

• 항공우주정책ㆍ법학회지
• /
• 제24권2호
• /
• pp.3-17
• /
• 2009

항공기에 의한 지상 제3자 피해 보상에관한 조약체제로서 1933년의 로마조약, 1952년 로마조약, 1978년의 로마조약등 소위 로마조약체제가 발효되어 있으나 주요 민간항공국가들을 포함한 대다수의 국가들이 가입 당사국이 되지않아 실효를 보지 못한 것이 현실이다. 본 논문에서는 로마조약체제의 발전경과와 실패원인을 분석하고, 2009년 4월20일부터 5월2일까지 몬트리올 ICAO본부에서 개최된 외교회의에서 체결된 2009몬트리올협약들 즉 일반위험협약 과 불법간섭(방해)협약의 주요 내용과 문제점들에 관하여 종전의 로마협약들과 비교 검토하였다. 특히 불법간섭협약의 국제민간항공기금은 운영상 예상되는 제반 문제들로 가까운 장래에 발효가 어려울것으로 예상된다.

• 통상정보연구
• /
• 제17권2호
• /
• pp.173-197
• /
• 2015

정보통신기술의 발달은 전자상거래의 규모를 더욱 확대시켰고, 거대한 인터넷 쇼핑몰을 성장시켰다. 최근에 소비자들이 해외직접구매(이하 '해외직구')에 대한 관심이 높아지면서 해외직구 건수 및 이용금액은 지속적으로 증가하고 있다. 그러나 해외직구를 통한 소비가 증가함에 따라 소비자들의 피해와 분쟁도 증가하고 있어 해외직구를 이용하는데 세심한 주의가 필요로 한다. 해외직구 이용 시 소비자피해가 발생하는 이유는 전자상거래(해외직구 포함)가 비대면 거래방식으로 인하여 사업자와 소비자의 신뢰문제, 물품의 배송, 반품, 환불의 거래 불이행 문제, 및 물품의 정보비대칭성 문제 때문에 넓은 범위에서 많은 다수의 소비자피해가 발생할 가능성이 높다. 본 연구에서는 국내의 해외직구 현황과 해외 직구 거래 시 소비자피해 구제와 소비자보호를 위한 사전적 사후적 개선방안을 통해 소비자피해 감소 및 정부의 정책방안을 제시하였다. 또한 실제 소비자 피해에 대한 보상이 미약하기 때문에 소비자피해에 대한 적극적인 보상 및 보호, 전자상거래의 위험전가, 전자상거래의 지속적인 발전을 위해 e-Commerce보험제도의 도입 실행 가능성에 대한 대안을 제안하였다.

• 한국산학기술학회논문지
• /
• 제16권9호
• /
• pp.5865-5874
• /
• 2015

최근들어 세월호 참사등의 대형사고는 인재로 밝혀지고 있고, 사고원인 역시 현장 대응 매뉴얼 부재와 관리사각지대, 안전불감증등으로 집약된다. 사고보다 더 큰 문제가 사업장의 안전불감증이다. 이 대목이 바로 안전사고를 낸 사업장과 사업주에 징벌적 손해배상제를 도입해야 하는 이유이기도 하다. 가해자의 불법행위로 인한 실질적인 손해배상에 추가하여 더 많은 금액을 배상함으로써 불법행위가 반복되는 상황을 막기위한 형벌적 성격을 띠고 있다. 현재는 기본적으로 손해를 끼친 피해에 상응하는 '보상적 손해배상제도'를 법률로 인정하고 있는데, 피해자를 제대로 구제하지 못하고 있다는 비판을 받고 있다. 그러나 안전사고 예방을 위해서는 징벌적 손해배상제도의 도입이 필요하다. 왜냐하면 이 제도는 후진적 안전사고의 재발을 막는 한편, 안전을 위한 투자 및 관리에 힘쓰는 건전한 기업에는 더욱 많은 기회를 주는 방향으로 운용될 수 있고, 국민의 안전을 위협하고 도외시하는 기업은 퇴출시키는 것이 사회정의에도 부합하기 때문이다.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제58권
• /
• pp.127-148
• /
• 2013

The Rotterdam Rules provide that port terminal operator may avoid or limit their liability for cargo loss, damage or delay in delivery or breach of any other obligation under the Rules by invoking the provisions that may provide a defence for, or limit the liability of, the carrier. Consequently the port terminal operator who are involved in the provision of maritime services may avoid or limit their liability for cargo loss, damage or delay in delivery or breach of any other obligation under the Rules. The port terminal operator to be applied for the Himalaya clause under the Rules must show that it has the requisite link with a Contracting State. In addition, the port terminal operator performs service to the period of time between the arrival of the goods at the port of loading and their departure from the port of discharge. The port terminal operator's liability for breaches of its obligation is limited to 875 SDR per package or other shipping units, or 3 SDR per kilogram of the gross weight of the goods. In addition, compensation for delay shall be limited to an amount equivalent to two and one-half times the fright payable on the goods delayed.

• 한국항공우주법학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 한국항공우주법학회 2008년도 제40회 국제학술발표대회
• /
• pp.121-140
• /
• 2008

Most compensation issues are regulated under domestic law where third parties are suffered damage from crushes of aircrafts or their falling objects. This issue was internationally recognized. A Convention to unify the rules of the law concerning damage caused by aircraft to the third parties on the surface was signed in May,1933( the 1933 Rome Convention) and it became effective in 1942. Later, modernization was carried out through the 1952 Rome Convention and the 1978 Montreal Protocol amending the 1933 Rome Convention. Ratifying States either to the Convention or to the Protocol is not as many as those States to the Warsaw Convention concerning air transport. In 1999, which was a turning point of changes of centuries from the twentieth century to the twenty first century, the Montreal Convention was passed to modernize the Warsaw Convention, and was quickly widespread. On September 11 2001, the coordinated simultaneous terror attacks occurred. In the circumstances, the issue modernizing the Rome Convention came up. Thus, workout under the initiatives of the Legal Committee of the ICAO is under operation to adopt new Rome Convention. In Japan, a study on the draft of the treaty was operated by which a working study group composed of experts from academy, industry and government was set up. This article, being based on that study, clarifies issues and gives future perspectives. This article presents author's individual views.

• 항공우주정책ㆍ법학회지
• /
• 제23권1호
• /
• pp.55-81
• /
• 2008

Most compensation issues are regulated under domestic law where third parties are suffered damage from crushes of aircrafts or their falling objects. This issue was internationally recognized. A Convention to unify the rules of the law concerning damage caused by aircraft to the third parties on the surface was signed in May, 1933( the 1933 Rome Convention) and it became effective in 1942. Later, modernization was carried out through the 1952 Rome Convention and the 1978 Montreal Protocol amending the 1933 Rome Convention. Ratifying States either to the Convention or to the Protocol is not as many as those States to the Warsaw Convention concerning air-transport. In 1999, which was a turning point of changes of centuries from the twentieth century to the twenty first century, the Montreal Convention was passed to modernize the Warsaw Convention, and was quickly widespread. On September 11 2001, the coordinated simultaneous terror attacks occurred. In the circumstances, the issue modernizing the Rome Convention came up. Thus, workout under the initiatives of the Legal Committee of the ICAO is under operation to adopt new Rome Convention. In Japan, a study on the ICAO Draft Convention was operated by which a working study group composed of experts from academy, industry and government was set up. This article, being based on that study, clarifies issues and gives future perspectives. This article presents author's individual views.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제30권2호
• /
• pp.145-164
• /
• 2020

With the development of the Internet, e-commerce is rapidly developing, and e-commerce through the Internet has become a major distribution channel for selling products and services to consumers and buyers. However, as Internet shopping develops, consumer dissatisfaction and conflict are increasing. In this regard, this study examined how consumer dissatisfaction caused by using an Internet shopping mall, which is currently taking the core position in commerce activities, leads to consumer complaints, and how these complaints affect the necessity and intention to use the arbitration system. As a result of the study, the following implications were obtained. First, it will be necessary to remove the root cause of consumer complaints by continuously monitoring consumer complaints, rather than staying at passive consumer complaints such as defective product exchange and damage compensation for dissatisfaction with Internet shopping malls. Second, it can be said that the function of the arbitration system is required to protect the rights and interests of consumers using the Internet shopping mall and to actively improve the problems in the event of a damage situation or a problem situation. Lastly, academia's continuous research will be needed, and governments and related organizations will need to continuously provide and promote information to users of Internet shopping malls.