• 환경정책연구
• /
• 제8권4호
• /
• pp.125-147
• /
• 2009

1990년에 제정되어 우리나라 환경법의 체계상 매우 중요한 위치를 차지하고 있는 환경정책기본법에는 그 제31조에 사업자등의 무과실책임을 규정하고 있는데, 이는 절대적 책임을 규정한 것으로서 비교법적으로 그 유례가 없을 정도로 강력한 효력을 지닌 규정이다. 여기에서는 환경정책기본법 제31조의 문제점을 알아보고 그 바람직한 개정방안을 우리나라 법체계와 동일한 대륙법계에 속하면서 1990년에 환경책임법을 제정하여 시행하면서 비교법적으로 좋은 시사점을 제시해주고 있는 독일환경책임법에 비추어 모색해 본다. 첫째, 환경정책기본법 제31조가 일반조항의 형태로서 구성요건적 내용을 포괄적으로 규정하고 있어서 구성요건의 구체적인 기준에 대한 해석을 둘러싸고 논란이 예상되므로 '사업자등'에서의 '사업자등'에 대한 개념규정이 필요하다. 둘째, 고의 과실의 문제와 관련하여 우리 환경정책기본법은 제31조 제1항에서 "사업장 등에서 발생하는 환경오염 또는 환경훼손으로 인하여 피해가 발생한 때에는 당해 사업자는 그 피해를 배상하여야 한다."고 규정하고, 동법 제3조에서 '환경오염'이라 함은 "사업활동 기타 사람의 활동에 따라 발생되는 대기오염, 수질오염, 토양오염, 방사능오염, 소음 진동, 악취, 일조방해 등으로서 사람의 건강이나 환경에 피해를 주는 상태를 말한다."고 규정하고 있는데 이는 시설책임보다는 시설 및 행위책임으로 보인다. 우리 환경정책기본법과 같이 무과실의 위험책임을 근간으로 하는 독일환경책임법이 위험책임에 기초하면서도 행위책임이 아니라 시설책임에 따름으로써 그 적용범위를 제한하고 있는 점과, 시설책임에 의하면서도 가능한 한 추상성을 배제하기 위하여 시설의 종류를 별표 I에서 나열하는 열거주의를 채택함으로써 무과실책임의 적용 주체를 가능한 한 명확하게 하고 있는 점을 타산지석으로 삼을 필요가 있다. 셋째, 책임제한의 구체적 기준을 위하여 독일환경책임법 제5조와 같은 물적 손해배상 책임의 배제규정을 참조하여 물적 손해배상책임의 제한 규정을 둘 필요가 있다. 넷째, 무과실의 위험책임에 따르더라도 가해행위와 손해 사이의 인과관계가 입증되어야 하는데 전문지식이 결여된 피해자가 입증책임을 부담해야 한다는 원칙은 입증의 어려움을 더하고 있다. 따라서 피해자를 입증책임의 곤란으로부터 구제하기 위하여 독일환경책임법상의 '인과관계의 추정'규정을 벤치마킹하여 피해자를 가해자(시설보유자)보다 유리한 지위에 서게 할 필요가 있다. 다섯째, 환경손해의 원인을 밝혀내기 위해서 피해자의 시설보유자(가해자)에 대한 정보청구권, 시설보유자의 다른 시설보유자 및 피해자 또는 주무관청에 대한 정보청구권 등을 두는 것이 필요하며, 더 나아가 환경정보법의 제정이 필요하다고 할 것이다. 여섯째, 명문으로 천재지변, 전쟁, 제3자의 행위 등에 의한 면책조항을 규정하여 이러한 불가항력적 사유에 터잡은 손해에 대하여는 배상의무가 발생하지 않도록 하여야 할 것이다. 일곱째, 환경오염에 대한 잠재적 가해자인 시설보유자의 급부능력을 담보하기 위하여 환경오염에 의한 손해의 배상의무(전보준비, Deckungsvorsorge)를 이행하기 위한 조치를 강구하는 규정이 필요하다. 여덟째, 이상의 논의들을 고려하고 환경정책기본법 제31조 제1항의 구체적 효력의 인정 여부를 둘러싼 논란을 잠재우고, 궁극적으로 피해자의 권리보호에 충실하기 위해 환경책임체계를 총괄하는 별도의 법인 가칭 '환경책임법'을 제정할 필요가 있다. 다수의 법률의 양산을 지양한다는 관점에서 기존의 환경정책기본법에 책임 조항과 관련한 별도의 장을 마련하는 것을 차선의 대안으로 생각해 볼 수 있다.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제15권
• /
• pp.7-31
• /
• 2001

All legal systems set out the principle of full compensation of damages, which aims to fulfil the plaintiff's expectations by putting him into as good a position as he would have been in if the contract had been performed. On the other hand, they place some limitations on the full recoverability of damages for breach of contract. In Civil Law systems, 'fault' is a necessary requirement for liability for damages, and the extent of recoverable damages is directly related to the degree of the dependent's fault. This principle, however, is not adopted by Common Law systems, in which the dependent would be liable in damages for breach of contract even though the breach was not due to his fault. The CISG is in a similar position to the latter systems. In Common Law systems as well as CISG, the extent of liability of the party in breach for damages depends on whether he foresaw or could have foreseen the damages at the time of contracting. Unlike the position in Civil Law systems, foreseeability seems to be the most effective principle to decide the extent. The tests for remoteness centre on reasonable foreseeability or contemplation of the loss. The party in breach is liable even for loss indirectly caused to the other party provided that this loss was foreseeable or contemplated by the party in breach. However, this manner to decide remoteness may lead to unreasonable results in some cases. If the party in breach were the inveterate pessimist who foresaw all sorts of possible damages, he could foresee damages too remote from the breach of duty. If this fact were revealed in the course of trial, he should be liable for such indirect damages. This is really undesirable result. Therefore, as to the remoteness test, the criterion of whether the loss is foreseen or contemplated must not be adopted. Foreseeability by reasonable person must be the only available criterion.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제12권2호
• /
• pp.219-263
• /
• 2011

"Wrongful conception" is a medical malpractice claim in which the plaintiff is the parent of a normal, healthy infant whose conception was unplanned and unwanted. Medical malpractice in wrongful conception can be the result of a failure to provide informed consent to a patient, failure to properly perform a surgery, or a physician's negligent handling of a patient's problems. In the concrete, wrongful conception cases fall into two categories; those involving pre-conception negligence, such as a failed contraceptive, sterilization or failing of the controlling of embryo-number on the IVF, and those involving post-conception negligence, such as a failure to diagnose a pregnancy or to perform an abortion procedure. In addition, Medical malpractice can be the result of a failure to provide informed consent to a patient. When bad results occur by medical malpractice or failure to provide informed consent to a patient, the range of recovery of damages is decided by a traditional civil liability law. However the calculation of damages for wrongful conception is not easy because the high value of life is included in that case. So many courts opinions in foreign country and Seoul High Court decision in 1996 allow damages for the pregnancy, birthing process and sterilization costs, but refuses to allow damages for child rearing expenses. As to the range of recovery of damages for wrongful conception, one approach says that to allow damages in a suit such as this would mean that the physician would have to pay for the fun, joy and affection which plaintiff will have in the rearing and educating of the plaintiff's baby. To allow such damages would be against the dignity of the baby based on article 10 of the Constitution. However another approach says that damages are recoverable for all expenses related to child birth as well as for child rearing costs. Because the damages that the parents should bear a burden to the tort damage done is not a baby itself but child rearing costs. In other words, although the baby is healthy or not, economic burden of the parents can not be disregard. And denial of compensation for costs of child rearing may invalidate the role of liability law, grant the physician with a exemption certificate of liability. As a result, the medical field of procreation can be easily isolated from a liability of reparation. Therefore, on the liability law like the other medical malpractice action, parents who became pregnant or gave a birth by physician, wrongfully performed sterilization operation, etc. should be compensated for all damages relevant to unplanned and unwanted conception or birth as well as costs of child rearing.

• 항공우주정책ㆍ법학회지
• /
• 제5권
• /
• pp.171-205
• /
• 1993

On the contrary to the general principle of private law, carriers' liability for passengers and cargo owners have been quantatively limited in some cases. The author traces the rule of liability limitation in the law of Korea and United States to verify two hypotheses. The first hypothesis is that the rule of liability limitation has been introduced to motivate investment when new technology with high risk has been adopted in business. The second hypothesis is that the rule of liability limitation can be maintained only when damages have been fully compensated. The former is a necessary condition for liability limation, and the latter sufficient condition. There are strong evidences for the first hypothesis. Navigation or aviation, artificial satellite lauching, urban transportation system are good examples. The second hypothesis is supported by the fact that there have been continuous controversies on the Warsaw System, including the failure of ratification of Montreal Additional Protocols No.3 & 4 by the U.S. Senate and voluntary removal of liability limitation by the Japanese airline companies. Loss of cargo can be compensated fully, but damages from personal injury and death not. The value of human body and life is not easy to be estimated. Passengers, moreover, do not usually buy insurance for accidents in travel. Passengers do not accept insurance premium as the cost of being whole and alive. They do not accept accident rates realistically. They have no bargaining power in dealing with insurers. The rule of liability limitation in personal losses would not be supported in future because damages have not fully compensated.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제69권
• /
• pp.45-62
• /
• 2016

Price reduction under CISG Art. 50 is advantageous to a buyer because it is a self-help remedy to the buyer. It is the buyer that has the option and the power to reduce the price paid or to be paid to the seller. Price reduction is indispensable in such cases where the seller is relieved of liability. In such cases the remedy of price reduction is the only one giving the buyer monetary relief. Another special role of price reduction is to determine how much the buyer owes the seller for non-conforming goods when special circumstances relieve the seller of liability for damages. In any event, price reduction has been designed both as an alternative to damages and for cases where the non-performing party is excused from liability for damages. The price reduction remedy however leaves several issues for clarification and application in several respects.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제66권
• /
• pp.119-148
• /
• 2015

Generally, the liability for breach is defined as the civil liability that arises from the conduct of violation of a contract. There are two notable principles governing liability for breach that have fundamental impacts on the unified Contract Law of the People's Republic of China (hereinafter Chinese Contract Law) in the remedies. In China, during the drafting of the Contract Law, there was a great debate as to whether damages for breach of contract ought to follow the fault principle or to follow the strict liability principle. Ultimately the Chinese Contract Law follows the model of the CISG on this point, namely, it follows the strict liability principle (article 107) with an exemption cause of force majeure. Under Chinese Contract Law, it is interpreted as strict liability in principle. Strict Liability is a notion introduced into Chinese Contract Law from the Anglo-Saxon Law. The strict liability or no fault doctrine, on the contrary, allows a party to claim damages if the other party fails to fulfill his contractual obligations regardless of the fault of the failing party. Pursuant to the strict liability doctrine, if the performance of a contract is due, any non-performance will constitute a breach and the fault on the party in breach is irrelevant. This paper reviews problems of legal character or legal ground of contractual liability in Chinese contract law. Specifically, focusing on the interpretation of Chinese contract law sections and analysis of three cases related contractual liability in freight agency, the paper proposes some implications of structural features of Chinese contract law and international commercial transactions.

• 항공우주정책ㆍ법학회지
• /
• 제22권2호
• /
• pp.27-51
• /
• 2007

The cumulative result of the work by the ICAO Secretariat, the Secretariat Study Group and the Council Special Group on the Modernization of the Rome Convention of 1952 are two draft Conventions, namely: "Draft Convention on Compensation for Damage Caused by Aircraft to Third Parties, in case of Unlawful Interference", and "Draft Convention on Compensation for Damage Caused by Aircraft to Third Parties" The core provisions of the former draft Convention are as follows: The liability of the operator is strict, that is, without the necessity of proof of fault. It would be liable for damage sustained by third parties on condition only that the damage was caused by an aircraft in flight(Article 3). However, such liability is caped based on the weight of the aircraft(Article 4). It is envisaged to create an independent organization called the Supplementary Compensation Mechanism, with the principle purpose to pay compensation to persons suffering damage in the territory of a State Party, and to provide financial support(Article 8). Compensation shall be paid by the SCM to the extent that the total amount of damages exceeds the Article 4 limits(Article 19). The main issues on the farmer draft Convention are relating to breaking away from Montreal Convention 1999, no limits on individual claims but a global limitation on air carrier liability, insurance coverage, cap of operators' strict liability, and Supplementary Compensation Mechanism. The core provisions of the latter draft Convention are as follows: the liability of the operator is strict, up to a certain threshold tentatively set at 250,000 to 500,000 SDRs. Beyond that, the operator is liable for all damages unless it proves that such damage were not due to its negligence or that the damages were solely due to the negligence of another person(Article 3). The provisions relating to the SCM and compensation thereunder do not operate under this Convention, as the operator is potentially for the full amount of damages caused. The main issues on the latter draft Convention are relating to liability limit of operator, and definition of general risks. In conclusion, we urge ICAO to move forward expeditiously on the draft Convention to establish a third party liability and compensation system that can stand ready to protect both third party victims and the aviation industry before another 9/11-scale event occurs.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제28권4호
• /
• pp.43-59
• /
• 2018

This study aims to review various efforts required by medical institutions to prevent medical accidents in advance and to suggest the necessity of introducing liability insurance for medical accidents based on cases abroad and compulsory professional indemnity insurance at home. Over the past five years between 2013 and 2017, the number of inquiries regarding medical accidents and medical disputes has increased by 11.1 percent from 36,099 to 54,929, and the number of mediation and arbitration for medical disputes has increased by 14.3 percent from 1,304 to 2,225. Since some medical accidents even cause social problems, a compulsory insurance system for the liability of medical institutions for damages need to be introduced to promptly compensate the victims of medical accidents and to ensure compensation by medical personnel. In Korea, a system is in place to provide compensation for a client who suffers an accidental damage after receiving professional services, regardless of whether or not the professional service provider can provide compensation. In major foreign countries, a medical liability system is in place that is applied either by the principle of liability with fault, or the principle of liability without fault. In this study, the cases of compulsory insurance and semi-compulsory insurance in the US and Japan to which the principle of liability with fault is applied, as well as the case of New Zealand to which the principle of liability without fault is applied, were examined. It is necessary to urgently introduce the compulsory insurance system for the liability of compensation to prevent medical disputes and to compensate for the life and physical damages of the victims of medical accidents in domestic medical institutions. Doing so is expected to ensure fair compensation for the victims of medical malpractice and compensation by medical personnel, thereby improving medical practice.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제34권
• /
• pp.3-26
• /
• 2007

Product liability law lies at the center of the modem world. This law concerns liability for damages arising from the commercial sale of a product that causes personal injury or property damage because it was defective or falsely represented. One engaged in the business of selling or otherwise distributing products who sells or distributes a defective product is subject to liability for harm to persons or property caused by the defect. In short, product defectiveness is the heart of products liability law. Regardless of the underlying cause of action, the plaintiff in nearly every products liability case must prove that the defendant's product contained an unnecessary hazard that caused the harm. The purpose of this paper is to clarify the meaning of the product defectiveness to products liability claims in China. In China, Product to include most movable personal property, but to exclude services. And a product is defective when, at the time of sale or distribution, it contains a manufacturing defect, is defective in design, or is defective because of inadequate instructions or warnings.

• 항공우주정책ㆍ법학회지
• /
• 제29권2호
• /
• pp.3-54
• /
• 2014

오랜 논의와 노력 끝에 우리나라 상법 제6편 항공운송편이 신설되어 2011년 11월부터 시행되었다. 상법 항공운송편은 국내항공운송으로 인해 발생한 항공 운송인의 손해배상책임 문제와 항공기 운항으로 인해 발생한 지상 제3자에 대한 항공기운항자의 손해배상책임 문제 등을 규율하기 위해 제정되었다. 상법 항공운송편은 관련 국제 조약들과 항공선진국들의 국내입법을 충분히 비교 검토하여 우리 법으로 수용하였기 때문에 국제 기준에 부합한다는 장점도 있지만, 항공기운항자의 지상 제3자에 대한 손해배상책임 규정을 중심으로 다음과 같이 개선해야 할 내용들도 포함하고 있다. 첫째, 상법 항공운송편상 항공기운항자의 지상 제3자 손해에 대한 배상책임 한도액은 피해자에 대한 적절한 배상을 하기에는 너무 낮은 수준으로 규정되어 있어 상향될 필요성이 있다. 따라서 독일과 같이 2009년 체결된 일반위험협약 및 불법방해배상협약의 관련 내용을 수용하여 항공기의 중량에 따른 분류기준을 10단계로 세분화하고 총 책임한도액을 최대 7억 SDR까지 상향시키면서, 인적 손해에 대한 배상책임한도액은 기존의 법무부 검토안처럼 최근의 물가상승률을 반영하여 현 규정의 5배 수준인 1인당 62만5천SDR까지 상향 조정하는 방안을 생각해 볼 수 있다. 이 방안이 한 사고당 항공사에게 일반적으로 보험으로서 보장되는 단일배상책임한도액이나 다양화 된 항공기 제원을 반영하면서도 지상 제3자에게 현실에 맞는 적절한 손해배상을 할 수 있다는 점에서 가장 바람직하다고 본다. 둘째, 항공기운항자는 현 상법 항공운송편상 항공기 납치 공격이나 9 11 테러와 같은 항공기를 이용한 공격행위 등과 같은 항공기테러에 의한 지상 제3자의 손해에 대하여도 무과실책임을 부담한다. 이에 관하여는 항공기운항자에게 지나치게 가혹하고 불합리한 입법이라는 견해가 있지만, 항공기운항자에게도 일정 부분 테러를 방지할 법적 의무가 있고 피해를 입은 제3자 구제 측면에서 그것이 항공기운항자에게 지나치게 가혹하거나 불합리하다고 생각되지는 않는다. 그러나 9 11테러와 같이 조직화 된 테러단체에 의해 항공기가 테러에 이용되어 지상 제3자 피해가 발생한 경우에도 항공기운항자가 피해자들에게 무과실책임을 지도록 하는 것은 불합리하며, 이러한 경우에는 항공기운항자의 책임이 면제되는 방향으로 상법 항공운송편 규정은 개정되어야 할 것이다. 셋째, 항공기사고와 같은 항공기 운항으로 인한 피해의 엄청난 규모를 고려해 볼 때, 다수의 피해자들이 경제적 어려움에 직면할 수 있으므로 항공여객의 인적 손해에 대한 항공운송인의 배상책임 발생 시 적용되는 선급금 지급 규정을 항공기운항자의 책임 발생 사례에도 준용할 필요가 있다고 본다. 넷째, 현행 상법 항공운송편상 항공기운항자의 손해배상책임 규정은 항공기 운항으로 인한 피해가 지상 또는 수면 및 수중에서 발생된 경우에만 적용되고 공중에서 발생한 피해에는 적용되지 않는다. 하지만 다른 항공기의 운항으로 인한 공중에서 발생된 항공기 등의 손해가 지상이나 수면 및 수중에서 발생한 손해와 차이가 있다고 볼 수 없다. 그러므로 상법 항공운송편상 '지상 제3자'라는 용어에서 '지상'이란 용어를 삭제하여 다른 항공기 운항으로 인한 공중에서의 항공기 등의 손해에도 상법 항공운송편상 항공기운항자의 지상 제3자 손해 배상책임 관련 규정이 적용될 수 있게 하는 것이 바람직하다고 본다. 위에서 제시된 상법 항공운송편상 항공기운항자의 지상 제3자 손해에 대한 배상책임 관련 규정의 개선방안 검토와 동 규정의 보완을 위한 지속적인 관심과 노력을 통하여, 상법 항공운송편이 피해를 입은 지상 등의 제3자에게 현실에 맞는 적절한 배상을 할 수 있게 하면서도 항공기운항자에게 과도한 부담을 지우지 않는 상호 간의 이익 균형상 더욱 바람직한 방향으로 발전되기를 희망한다.