• 의료법학
• /
• 제10권2호
• /
• pp.85-113
• /
• 2009

In this paper, the Judgment 2007DA76290 of the Korean Supreme Court was analysed in two points of the legal theory and litigation. The judgment arouses some issues of medical malpractice liability. They includes the concept of the complications and permanent lesion and the difference between them, some problems in a judge's applying the requirements for the physician's tort liability to the medical malpractice situations, the theory of obligation de moyens related with the burden of proof of the negligent conduct for a physician's liability for misperformance of contract, the influence of a patient's physical conditions on the physician's liability, the breach of duty to disclose in selecting the safer one of the treatment methods bringing about the complications or leaving the permanent lesion and so on. In the situations of the case referred to above, the plaintiff should have tried to establish that a reasonable physician in the specific situation of the case would have substituted the safer method of treatment for the method in the case. If the plaintiff had succeeded in establishing it, he or she could have recovered even the physical harm resulting from the permanent lesion brought about by the complications of the specific treatment in the case. The plaintiff failed to do so and recovered only the emotional distress which the patient suffered owing to the physician's breach of the duty to disclose. Therefore the legal malpractice of the counsel might be found in this case.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제14권2호
• /
• pp.217-260
• /
• 2013

In connection to the civil liability of the medical malpractice, plaintiff and courts are solving the medical disputes with theory of the liability based on tort law. because contract law does not enact the right of claim of solatium and a plaintiff's lawyer and courts hesitate to use contract law. Medical treatment of doctor is main debt in medical contract and its in-complete performance gives rise to the violations of human's life, body and health. Consequently a breach of medical contract leads to violations of person-al rights. These violations spring from liability of contract as well as tort and damages from them are recognized based on medical contract law. A duty of explanation of doctor is a independent and appendant debt to the treatment debt. However its breach provokes violations of human's life, body and health as well as a right self-determination. Therefore consolation money claim should be recognized. In case of the violation of patient's life, body and health, patient's family al-so can demand consolation money due to the violation of their's own mental pain. However in case of the violation of only patient's self-determination without informed concent, they can not demand it by reason of the violation of patient's self-determination. But by reason of the violation of patient's life, body and health that were recognized by proximate causal relation between violation of duty of explanation and abd execution, they can do.

• 항공우주정책ㆍ법학회지
• /
• 제5권
• /
• pp.101-118
• /
• 1993

Generally there is no law and liability system which applies particulary to commercial space ventures. There are several international treaties and national statutes which deal with space ventures, but their impact on the liability of commercial space ventures has not been significant. Every state law in the United States will impose both tort and contract liability on those responsible for injuries or losses caused by defective products or by services performed negligently. As with the providers of other products and services, those who participate in commercial space ventures have exposure to liability in both tort and contract which is limited to the extent of the resulting damage The manufacturer of a small and cheap component which caused a satellite to fail to reach orbit or to operate nominally has the same exposure to liability as the provider of launch vehicle or the manufacturer of satellite into which the component was incorporaded. Considering the enormity of losses which may result from launch failure or satellite failure, those participated in commercial space ventures will do their best to limit their exposure to liability by contract to the extent permitted by law. In most states of the United States, contracts which limit or disclaim the liability are enforceable with respect to claims for losses or damage to property if they are drafted in compliance with the requirements of the applicable law. In California an attempt to disclaim the liability for one's own negligence will be enforceable only if the contract states explicitly that the parties intend to have the disclaimer apply to negligence claims. Most state laws of the United States will refuse to enforce contracts which attempt to disclaim the liability for gross negligence on public policy grounds. However, the public policy which favoured disclaiming the liability as to gross negligence for providers of launch services was pronounced by the United States Congress in the 1988 Amendments to the 1984 Commercial Space Launch Act. To extend the disclaimer of liability to remote purchasers, the contract of resale should state expressly that the disclaimer applies for the benefit of all contractors and subcontractors who participated in producing the product. This situation may occur when the purchaser of a satellite which has failed to reach orbit has not contracted directly with the provider of launch services. Contracts for launch services usually contain cross-waiver of liability clauses by which each participant in the launch agrees to be responsible for it's own loss and to waive any claims which it may have against other participants. The crosswaiver of liability clause may apply to the participants in the launch who are parties to the launch services agreement, but not apply to their subcontractors. The role of insurance in responding to many risks has been critical in assisting commercial space ventures grow. Today traditional property and liability insurance, such as pre-launch, launch and in-orbit insurance and third party liability insurance, have become mandatory parts of most space projects. The manufacture and pre-launch insurance covers direct physical loss or damage to the satellite, its apogee kick moter and including its related launch equipment from commencement of loading operations at the manufacture's plant until lift off. The launch and early orbit insurance covers the satellite for physical loss or damage from attachment of risk through to commissioning and for some period of initial operation between 180 days and 12 months after launch. The in-orbit insurance covers physical loss of or damage to the satellite occuring during or caused by an event during the policy period. The third party liability insurance covers the satellite owner' s liability exposure at the launch site and liability arising out of the launch and operation in orbit. In conclusion, the liability in commercial space ventures extends to any organization which participates in providing products and services used in the venture. Accordingly, it is essential for any organization participating in commercial space ventures to contractually disclaim its liability to the extent permitted by law. To achieve the effective disclaimers, it is necessary to determine the applicable law and to understand the requirements of the law which will govern the terms of the contract. A great deal of funds have been used in R&D for commercial space ventures to increase reliability, safety and success. However, the historical reliability of launches and success for commercial space ventures have proved to be slightly lower than we would have wished for. Space insurance has played an important role in reducing the high risks present in commercial space ventures.

• 항공우주정책ㆍ법학회지
• /
• 제32권2호
• /
• pp.67-100
• /
• 2017

항공산업이 비약적으로 발달을 함에 따라, 항공기사고의 위험성도 커지고 있다. 본 논문에서는 항공기사고의 인적요인 중 하나인 항공교통관제사 불법행위를 중심으로 다루었다. 현재 우리나라의 법령상 항공교통관제사의 불법행위 대한 책임을 규정한 명문은 없다. 따라서 국가공무원으로서의 항공교통관제사의 법적책임에 대하여 헌법제 29조1항과 국가배상법의 적용 여부를 살펴보았다. 실제로 우리나라는 항공사고의 원인이 항공관제사 과실에 의한 것이라는 유일한 판례가 1971년에 선고된 이후, 항공사고조사결과 관제사의 과실이 사고의 주요요인이었다고 함에도 불구하고 추가판례가 없는 상황이다. 본 논문은 항공사고에 있어서 관제사와 조종사간 요인 뿐만 아니라, 관제사에 대한 실제로 법령의 적용가능성을 해외사례를 통해 살펴보았다. 항공교통관제라는 특수한 업무가 고강도의 업무스트레스를 갖는 업무라 할지라도, 항공교통관제의 최종목적인 항공기의 안전한 운항을 책임지고 있는 전문가로서 항공기사고의 원인이 되었다면, 그에 따른 법적 책임은 져야 한다는 내용을 다루었다.

• 항공우주정책ㆍ법학회지
• /
• 제23권1호
• /
• pp.3-32
• /
• 2008

In proportion to recent developments in aviation technology and growth of the air transport market, the risk of damages to third parties caused by aircrafts and the likelihood of unlawful interference on an aircraft in flight has grown larger. The war risk insurance market was paralyzed by the 9/11 terror event. And if another event on the scale of 9/11 occurs, compensations for third party damages will be impossible. Recognizing the need to modernize the existing legal framework and the absence of a globally accepted authority that deals with third party liability and compensation for catastrophic damage caused by acts of unlawful interference, the ICAO and various countries have discussed a liability and compensation system that can protect both third party victims and the aviation industry for the 7 years. In conclusion, in order to provide adequate protection for victims and the appropriate protection for air transport systems including air carriers, work on modernizing the Rome Convention should be continued and the new Convention should be finalized in the near future. Korea has not ratified the relevant international treaties, i.e. Rome Convention 1933, 1952 and 1978, and has no local laws which regulate the damage caused by aircraft to third parties on land. Consequently, it has to depend on the domestic civil tort laws. Most of the advanced countries in aviation such as the United States, England, Germany, France and even China, have incorporated the International Conventions to their national air law and governed carriers third party liability within their jurisdiction. The Ministry of Justice organized the Special Enactment Committee for Air Transport chapter under Commercial Law. The Air Transport chapter, which currently includes third party liability, is in the process of instituting new legislation. In conclusion, to settle such problems through local law, it is necessary to enact as soon as possible domestic legislation on the civil liability of the air carrier which has been connected with third party liability and aviation insurance.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제11권1호
• /
• 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.

• 한국컴퓨터정보학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 한국컴퓨터정보학회 2018년도 제58차 하계학술대회논문집 26권2호
• /
• pp.248-251
• /
• 2018

현대사회에 있어서 스포츠는 혼란한 환경 속에서 활동하고 있는 바쁜 우리들에게 긴장감을 완화시켜 주고 건강한 신체를 유지하도록 함과 동시에 삶의 질을 강화시킬 수 있는 서비스를 지원하고 있다. 단지 스포츠는 현대사회에서 체육인이나 운동선수에게만 한정된 영역이 아니라 스포츠가 새롭게 만들어 내는 수많은 대상은 상당히 다양하고 복잡하다, 뿐만 아니라 스포츠를 통해서 국위선양은 물론 월드컵 축구 및 올림픽경기 등을 통한 국제사회에서 대단한 외교적, 경제적, 정치적 영향을 끼치고 있으며, 또한 스포츠를 통한 국내외 경제활동에도 수많은 긍정적인 영향을 주고 있다. 이처럼 현대사회에서 스포츠가 생활화되어 많은 사람들이 스포츠를 자연스러운 생활의 일부분으로 받아들이고 있으나, 스포츠와 관련하여 우연적으로 많은 사고가 발생할 가능성을 내포하고 있는 것도 사실이다. 따라서 본 연구에서는 스포츠사고에 있어서 민법상 어떤 책임을 부담하는지를 살펴보고 그에 대한 합리적인 해결방안을 모색하고자 한다.

• 한국항해항만학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 한국항해항만학회 2006년도 추계학술대회 논문집(제2권)
• /
• pp.21-26
• /
• 2006

선박건조계약은 일반적으로 각 당사자의 권리와 의무 및 상대방에 대한 책임 등에 대하여 내용이 상당히 복잡하고 구체적으로 규정되며, 계약의 최종 목적은 선박 건조자가 완성된 선박을 매수인인 선주에게 이전하는 것이다. 이 계약은 영국법, 미국법, 개정독일민법(BGB), 그리고 기타 여러국가의 법에서 매매계약으로 보고 있으며, 반면에 한국과 일본 그밖의 여러국가에서는 도급계약으로 취급한다. 특별히 최근 여러 국가에서 안전상 사람에 대하여 상해를 일으킨 경우, 불법행위에 의한 제조자의 제조물책임이 잘 정착되어 있는 실정이다. 반면, 제3자에 대한 순수 경계적인 손실에 대해서는 그 물건의 소유자에게 그 책임이 확대되었다. 해사사건에 있어서 계약상 워런티나 묵시적인 워런티를 위반한 경우, 사건의 장소나 전통적인 해사 관련성에 의하여 해사재판관할권이 적용되어 진다. 즉 물품의 하자와 관련된 사건인 경우, 계약법상 워런티가 첫째 유형으로 적용되고, 불법행위에 의한 것은 두 번째 유형으로 적용된다. 그러므로 본 논문에서는 먼저 선박건조계약상 건조자의 계약책임에 대하여 영국법을 중심으로 고찰하고 다음으로 영국, 미국, 독일, 그리고 한국의 제조물책임법을 비교하여 결론적으로 각국들의 제조물책임에 대한 한국 조선소들의 대응전략을 제시함을 본 논문의 목적으로 한다

• 항공우주정책ㆍ법학회지
• /
• 제1권
• /
• pp.163-191
• /
• 1989

The accident of the midair collision, passengers' falling or goods' dropping occurs or supersonic aircraft make a sonic boom during their conveying passengers or goods to the destination. The accident in transmit damages the their parties on the surface or their properties. In these cases, the third parties who were harmed to their lives or properties have the right to claim damages against the air carrier who caused them. These matters have become one of the important things since aircraft conveyed passengers and goods. Therefore, it is a great concern to settle these matters by law. But the Safety of the present aircraft has been much increased and the aircraft have become larger in size. Its flight altitude became higher than before. So the relationship of the aircraft to the third parties is much different from that of the earlier aircraft. The air transport is now indispensable to our life. It is not so easy to control these matters. In the early part of 20th century, when the third parties suffered the damage, many European countries made laws on the basis of the principle of liability without fault. But each country had a variety of its own law, and different kinds of difficulties have been brought about. Accordingly, the Rome Convention on Surface Damage (1933, 1952, 1978) has been made and revised. In spite of being revised, it contains many problems, and is not carried into effect world-wide. On the other hand, there are no regulations about the compensation of the third parties damaged in Korean existing laws. In case the damage is brought about to them, it is obviously true that the settlement of the liability of compensation for damage should be made by the general principle on the tort in domestic laws. At this point, it is urgent that we make a special law though the domestic legislation as a preliminary measure before we sign the international convention to save third damaged. It is desirable that we should, for the responsibility of the air carriage for the demage of the third parties on the surface, bring in the theory of the absolute liability in view of the legislation of many conutries. As the aircraft fly in the sky, their flight always contains some danger. It is very difficult to prove the fault, and the operator should suffer the principle of liability without fault or the similiar one. In case the liability without fault will be imposed upon the operator for the damage of the third parties, it is necessary to bring in the liability protection system for the protection and up upbringing of the air carriage. The Burden of danger of the air carriage will be reduced by introducing the system. A domestic legislation measure should be necessarily taken as soon as possible as a legal security measure on these matters.

• 항공우주정책ㆍ법학회지
• /
• 제27권1호
• /
• pp.75-101
• /
• 2012

As the Reublic of Korea revised the Commercial Code including 40 articles of air transport enacted newly on May 23, 2011, so Korea became first legislative examples in the Commercial Code of the developed and developing countries. I would like to explain briefly the main contents of my paper such as (1) history of enacting newly Part VI (air transport) in the Korea's revised commercial law, (2) legal background enacting newly Part VI (air transport) in the Korea's revised commercial law and the problems on the conditions of air transport, (3) every countries' legislative examples on the civil liability of aircraft's operator, (4) unlawful Interference Convention and general risk convention of 2009, (5) main contents and prospects of the revised Commercial Code for the liability of aircraft's operator etc as the followings. Meanwhile as the Aviation Act, Commercial Code and Civil Code in Korea and Japan did not regulated at all the legal basis of solution on the disputes between victims and offender for the amount of compensation for damage due to personal or property damage caused by aircraft accidents in Korea and Japan, so it has been raised many legal problems such as protection of victims, standard of decision in trial in the event of aircraft accident's lawsuit case. But the Korean Revised Commercial Code including Part VI, air transport regulations was passed by the majority resolution of the Korean National Assembly on April 29, 2011 and then the South Korean government proclaimed it on May 23 same year. The Revised Commercial Code enforced into tothe territory of the South Korea from November 24, 2011 after six month of the proclaimed date by the Korean Government. Thus, though Korean Commercial Code regulated concretely and respectively the legal relations on the liability of compensation for damage in the contract of transport by land in it's Part II (commercial activities) and in the contract of transport by sea in its Part V (marine commerce), but the Amended Commercial Act regulated newly 40 articles in it's Part VI (air transport) relating to the air carrier's contract liability on the compensation for damage caused by aircraft accidents in the air passengers and goods transport and aircraft operator's tort liability on compensation for damage caused by the sudden falling or collision of aircraft to third parties on the surface and so it was equipped with reasonable and unified system among the transport by land, marine and air. The ICAO adopted two new air law conventions setting out international compensation and liability rules for damage caused by aircraft to third parties at a diplomatic conference hosted by it from April 20 to May 2, 2009. The fight against the effects of terrorism and the improvement of the status of victims in the event of damage to third parties that may result either from acts of unlawful interference involving aircraft or caused by ordinary operation of aircraft, forms the cornerstone of the two conventions. One legal instrument adopted by the Conference is "the Convention on Compensation for Damage to Third Parties, Resulting from Acts of Unlawful Interference Involving Aircraft" (Unlawful Interference Convention). The other instrument, "the Convention on Compensation for Damage Caused by Aircraft to Third Parties" (General Risk Convention), modernizes the current legal framework provided for under the 1952 Rome Convention and related Protocol of 1978. It is desirable for us to ratify quickly the abovementioned two conventions such as Unlawful Interference Convention and General Risk Convention in order to settle reasonably and justly as well as the protection of the South Korean peoples.