• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.11 no.1
• /
• pp.91-116
• /
• 2010

As Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS) is a new and rare illness, medical cause for it has not yet been clearly found out. Nevertheless, the patients continue to file lawsuits for damage compensation against wrongdoers or their insurers, claiming that the cause of the illness is certain actions of the wrongdoers. Moreover, the claim amount reaches to hundreds of millions of won through billions of won unlike other illnesses. Therefore, CRPS has become an important legal issue in the damage compensation lawsuit. Even though the wound is slight, the development and result may be serious in the case of CRPS. As a result, a sharp conflict arises even regarding medical diagnosis of CRPS in the lawsuit. And, even if the medical diagnosis of CRPS is admitted, severe debates occurs with regard to many issues, which include the causation between accident and CRPS in connection with establishment of damage compensation liability and scope of liability like anamnesis, determination standard of aftereffect disability, and scope of admitted aftereffect medical expense in connection with scope of damage compensation. In this study, I will review fundamental medical research on CRPS up to now and discuss principal legal issues in the damage compensation lawsuit focusing on lower court rulings.

• International conference on construction engineering and project management
• /
• 2005.10a
• /
• pp.447-451
• /
• 2005

The purpose of this study is to improve regulations such as law and standard contract forms related to defects liability in Korea. Defects liability has been one of the major causes of construction contract disputes in Korea in recent years. It is important to avoid or resolve disputes regarding defects liability through regulations containing clear criteria and to specify the standard regarding the mitigation and remission of the contractor's defects liability. This study was carried out through document research and analysis of judicial precedents. The following are the courses of improvement regarding the mitigation and remission of defects liability in Korea. First, laws and standard contract forms must contain more detailed clauses regarding exemption of a contractor's defects liability, which clearly set out the scope of the defects liability of the contractor. Second, the current system for defects liability favors the owner rather than the contractor - it is necessary to change the defects liability system in order to give the owner and the contractor an equal standing. Third, strict liability is taken on by the contractor even when the term of guarantee for defects lasts longer than the legally set period of liability for defects. Hence, it is necessary to improve the system by alleviating the liability of the contractor through applying negligence liability as opposed to strict liability during the term of guarantee.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.13
• /
• pp.303-328
• /
• 2000

International Trade has led to the increase of the demand of international transport, and also the development of transport vehicles has been promoting the volumes of international trade. Therefore, the development of international transport not only incurs claims concerning transportation but also establishes various international rules to settle the claims between the shippers and the carriers in the course of transport. With a view to settling the claims successfully, the men who are concerned in the transport have to know the principle and scope of carrier's Liability. In this paper, I would like to find out the principle of Liability for the shippers. Therefore, I classify the Liability principle of the international transporter under the UNs Convention on International Multimodal Transport of Good(1980) and UNCTDAD/ICC Rules(1991) in three system - Network Liability System, Uniform Liability System and Modified Uniform Liability System.

• Journal of Environmental Policy
• /
• v.2 no.1
• /
• pp.107-135
• /
• 2003

This study reviews the proposed liability and redress regime under the Cartagena Protocol on Biodiversity. Several core elements for the regime are discussed in comparison with those listed in the 1999 Basel Protocol on Liability and Compensation for Damage resulting from the Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal. These are (1) scope of the rules and procedures; (2) channeling of liability; (3) legal standing; (4) definition of damage; (5) standard of care; (6) ancillary sources of compensation; (7) limitation of liability; (8) financial guarantees; and (9) mutual recognition and enforcement of judgments. Korea has given relatively little attention to the issue of liability and redress in the context of LMOs trade. As the Protocol is expected to enter into force soon, Korea needs to develop appropriate implementing domestic mechanisms for the Biosafety Protocol. Establishing an adequate domestic liability and compensation scheme will be one of the most important mechanisms not only to comply the Protocol but to ensure safety of LMOs in general. A further research is needed on the basis of a comparision of relevant legislations in different countries as well as analysis of current laws related to the accidents arising from LMOs trade, such as product liability laws, food safety laws, liability provisions in some environmental legislations.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.7 no.2
• /
• pp.113-136
• /
• 2006

In recent years, as well as the other countries, medical dispute cases increase continuously in China. one of the reason that medical cases increase rapidly like this is after reformation and opening people's sense of independence, law and right come to be high, but a theoretical study about medical malpractice liability is insufficient and there is deficiency at legislation from 1986 civil law general rule is carried out in Chinese. but it is difficulty to deal with those more and more complicated medical dispute only according to the law above. so in 2001 The Chinese Supreme Court established the judicial construction about civil litigation evidence which regulated the shift of the burden of proof of medical malpractice and the relation of cause and effect from the plaintiffs to the defendants. in 2002 the State Council made out Incident of Malpractice Processing Rule. but many scholar pointed out the problem in it. on the other side, according to Chinese Contract Law parties could choose contractual or tort liability to prosecute. but because of the judicial construction above majority of people asked tort liability. of course there are some cases asking contractual liability. then this paper aim at analysis of the Chinese medical malpractice liability, especially of the problems about the subject of responsibility, burden of proof and scope of responsibility.

• Korean Architects
• /
• s.563
• /
• pp.106-115
• /
• 2016

• Journal of the Korea Institute of Building Construction
• /
• v.13 no.3
• /
• pp.209-217
• /
• 2013

The execution of a construction project involves the engagement of many participants. Generally, the Authority uses CM to certify that the Work is built according to the contract documents. The CM work scope is expressed in the Construction Technology Management Act and its Regulation. The mandated and delegated CM services are limited to the construction period. If Contractor is required to repair a construction defect, the Contractor should bear the burden of the inspection service for the defect repair, because it is associated with him. Nevertheless, CM should submit a bond to provide the inspection and supervision service for the defect repair. These may result in conflict with each liability. Therefore, CM service in the law and regulation was investigated and analyzed in this study to classify the characteristics of CM contracts, and it was suggested that the CM liability for the inspection and supervision service for the defect repair should be reconsidered.

• Informatization Policy
• /
• v.30 no.1
• /
• pp.67-88
• /
• 2023

The expansion of the scope of product liability is necessary because the industrial environment has changed following the enactment of the Product Liability Act. Unlike human-coded algorithms, artificial intelligence is black-boxed according to machine learning, and even developers cannot explain the results. In particular, since the cause of the problem by artificial intelligence is unknown, the responsibility is unclear, and compensation for victims is not easy. This is because software or artificial intelligence is a non-object, and its productivity is not recognized under the Product Liability Act, which is limited to movable property. As a desperate measure, productivity may be recognized if it is stored or embedded in the medium. However, it is not reasonable to apply differently depending on the medium. The EU revise the product liability guidelines that recognize product liability when artificial intelligence is included. Although compensation for victims is the value pursued by the Product Liability Act, the essence has been overlooked by focusing on productivity. Even if an accident occurs using an artificial intelligence-adopted service, however, it is desirable to present standards according to practical risks instead of unconditionally holding product responsibility.

• Journal of the Korean Society for Aviation and Aeronautics
• /
• v.12 no.3
• /
• pp.41-63
• /
• 2004

The area covered by product liability in broadest sense is so vast that an attempt to analyse all its impact on the aviation world risk. Every effort has been made to confine our review of subject a closely as possible to its influence on aircraft manufacturers, airlines and passengers, in spite of strong connections with other spheres of commercial. Product Liability in aviation is the liability of aircraft's manufacturer, processor or non-manufacturing seller for injury to the person or property of a buyer or third party caused by a product which has been sold. Here-in a product is aircraft, third party is passengers who suffered damage by defective design, defective construction, inadequate instructions for handling in aircraft. Whenever a product turns out to be defective after it has been sold, there are under Anglo-American law three remedies available against the aircraft's manufacturer (1) liability for negligence (2) breach of warranty (3) strict liability in tort. There are Under continental law Three remedies available against the aircraft's manufacturer (1) liability for defective warranty (2) liability for non-fulfillment of obligation (3) liability in tort. It is worth pointing out here an action for breach of warranty or for defective warranty, for non-fulfillment of obligation is available only to direct purchaser on the basis of his contract with the aircraft's manufacturer, which of course weakness its range and effectiveness. An action for tort offers the advantage of being available also to third parties who have acquired the defective product at a later stage. In tort, obligations are constituted not only by contract, but also by stature and common law. In conclusion, There in no difference in principle of law. In conclusion I would like to make few suggestions regarding the product liability for aircraft's manufacturer. Firstly, current general product liability code does not specify whether government offices(e.g. FAA) inspector conducted the inspection and auditory certificate can qualify as conclusive legal evidence. These need to be clarified. Secondly, because Korea is gaining potential of becoming aircraft's manufacturer through co-manufacturing and subcontracting-manufacturing with the US and independent production, there needs legislation that can harmonize the protection of both aircraft's manufacturers and their injured parties. Since Korea is in primary stage of aviation industry, considerate policy cannot be overlooked for its protection and promotion. Thirdly, because aircraft manufacturers are risking restitution like air-carriers whose scope of restitution have widened to strict and unlimited liability, there needs importation of mandatory liability insurance and national warranty into the product liability for aircraft's manufacturers. Fourthly, there needs domestic legislation of air transportation law that clearly regulates overall legal relationship in air transportation such as carrier & aircraft manufacturer's liability, and aviation insurance.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.13
• /
• pp.257-281
• /
• 2000

The world economy is becoming increasingly globalized. The globalization has resulted in far reaching agreements to deepen trade liberalization and enlarge its scope to cover new areas in addition to strengthening its supporting institutional base. Economic growth has developed international trade which has accelerated the development of international carriage of goods in 21st century. The international trade is basically founded on the contract of international sale of goods and backed up by the contract of international carriage of goods and the insurance on the goods carried. It is essential to incorporate each other sections for the efficient development of international trade. As a result of rapid expansion of international carriage of goods, rationalization of transport was required, which has brought about the International Multimodal Transport System through containerization. The approach to liability system will be a right way to solve the insurance problems for the development and enlargement of world trade volume. International multimodal transport system has affected international trade a lot, especially the field of insurance a grate deal. This paper is to analyze contents of liability system on Multimodal Transport with in the UN Convention on International Multimodal Transport of goods.