• 의료법학
• /
• 제7권2호
• /
• pp.271-310
• /
• 2006

In the situation of bringing out of social problem about the medical accident and medical dispute, from 1988 the enactment activity for a legislative bill on conciliation of dispute has promoted, a legislative bill on prevention and relief of medical accident was again proposed in December, 2005. This bill has been faced rough going in review process of National Assembly. Because the purpose of this legislative bill is the conciliation of interest of between medical service consumer and medical service supplier, an item of issues of law is no-fault compensation scheme. However, as no-fault compensation scheme runs counter to the principle liability with fault in our civil law, as expected, whether the inducement is valid or, if induced, the problem is not must be totally reviewed. First of all, the general of principle liability without fault and especially the medical system in foreign countries are reviewed, by reviewing an issue and the pros and cons of the inducement of no-fault compensation scheme, this article draws the conclusion. After all, considering that the necessity adapting Gefahrdungschftung in medical accident as much as other industrial fields exists, the many provisions of the principle liability without fault exists in civil law and special law of our law system, and no-fault compensation scheme let legislative purpose be, to what extent, achieved by conciliating patient and doctor, the inducement of principle liability without fault in medical field is reasonable in the aspect of politic and legal system.

• 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.

• 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.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제11권1호
• /
• pp.59-84
• /
• 2010

Medical practice is characterized by various physiological response and uncapacity of prediction, therefore when medical accident occur it's hard to prove medical professionals' mistake. Though medical accident by medical professionals' mistake will be compensated anyhow, about irresistible medical accidents, no one should be not bound to compensate, victims get into very difficult situation. So, the nation don't negligent irresistible medical accidents but compensate anyway. As in the past, to the legal principle's constitution of irresistible medical accidents, theory of liability without fault was adapted, and it was said this theory was illogical in theory of liability with fault. But the subject of compensation to irresistible medical accidents is nation, nation don't participate in medical treatment therefore there is no room to occur mistake. And it is not reasonable to regard medical agency as a truster of public service, to cast to it responsibility of medical accidents. The problem of compensation to irresistible medical accidents is understood under the theory of social compensation. Social compensation is consisted of compensation to sacrifice and contribution to nation and society and compensation to sacrifice revealed under danger, the compensation to irresistible medical accidents belongs to the latter. This is near to concept of relief, is applied to national compensation system supplementarily, and compensation have no option but to compensate minimum. And there are not relation between national compensation system of irresistible medical accidents and proof liability transposition and theory of liability with out fault, merely in side of sharing responsibility burden between medical treater and victim, it is reasonable to discuss transportation of proof liability and compulsive liability insurance together.

• 항공우주정책ㆍ법학회지
• /
• 제12권
• /
• pp.36-65
• /
• 2000

The Montreal Convention markedly changed the rules governing the international carriage by air of passenger, baggage and cargo. The introduction of a considerable number of modernized major elements including electric ticketing system, the unlimited passenger liability regime and a supplementary (fifth) jurisdiction should help to remove aged scheme that now exists in the Warsaw Convention and other related instruments. The key issue of the electric ticketing system recognized by the Convention IS how to describe reasonably and adequately the terms of written notices, in the light of the principle of consumer protection. Regarding liability regime for passengers, an unlimited passenger liability regime is realized. The carrier, in the first tier, is subject to a strict liability regime of up to 100,000 SDRs, and in the second tire, a regime of presumed fault liability without numerical liability limits. To add to the present four fora, the fifth forum is permitted. Regarding damage resulting the death or injury of a passenger, an action for damages may also be brought in its home territory with the considerably qualified narrow requirements. A strange deviation from the well-established "Procedure for Approval of Draft Convention" carried out by the Legal Committee left a considerable number of unrefined and incomplete passages. In the near future, their modification should be required.

• 디지털융복합연구
• /
• 제14권6호
• /
• pp.51-60
• /
• 2016

현대 국가는 과학기술의 발달에 따른 산업화와 정보화 추세 속에서 다양한 위험이 항상 따르게 된다. 이러한 환경하에서, 공무원의 직무수행 중 불법행위로 인하여 국민이 손해를 입은 경우에, 이를 구제해 주기 위해 우리 헌법은 국가배상청구권을 보장하고 있다. 국가배상의 문제는 법치국가의 원리에 따른 피해자의 권리구제, 공무원의 불법행위의 억제, 안정된 공무수행의 보장, 국고의 안정 등의 다양한 가치들을 조화롭게 고려하여야 한다. 그런데 현대 법치국가에서 공무원이 한 행위를 국가가 책임을 지는 이상, 반드시 고의와 과실을 요건으로 하여야만 국가가 책임을 진다는 것에는 의문이 있을 수 있다. 또한 헌법에 합치되는 자기책임설의 이론에 의하게 되면 국가배상법상 과실책임주의는 배제되어야 한다. 국가배상법상 공무원의 배상책임과 관련하여 고의와 과실과 같은 주관적 책임요건은 필요하지 않다고 보아야 한다. 따라서 현행 국가배상법의 개정을 통하여서 국가배상법의 원리를 과실책임주의로부터 무과실책임주의로 전환하여야 할 필요성이 있다.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제71권
• /
• pp.147-170
• /
• 2016

International maritime law conventions concerned with cargo liabilities have sought to achieve solutions which will be acceptable to a wide range of states. The Rotterdam Rules was approved by the UN Assembly on 11 December 2008. The Rotterdam Rules are intended to replace The Hague and Hamburg Rules. This paper is comparing The Rotterdam Rules with The Hague and Hamburg Rules for the carrier' liabilities and exceptions in order to find carrier' liability System, the burden of proof and exceptions in the International maritime Rules. The purpose of this paper is considering the carrier's principal recourse for defending himself inmost cargo claims. The first area analyze the transfer of carrier's fundamental Liability system in the International Rules. The second is the matter on the appointment of proof in order to establish liability or to be relieve of liability. And the third is the change of the carrier's possible exclusions from liability in the International maritime Rules. From the result of the said analysis, my paper suggests differences of the exclusions in the Rotterdam Rules comparing with the Hague and Hamburg Rules, and features of the Rotterdam Rules appling exceptions on the basis of the Hague and Hamburg Rules with regard to carrier's liability and burden of proof. The former is the inclusion of three exclusions, the deleted natural fault, and The provision making the carrier responsible for the acts of its servants or agents in the 'fire on the ship' of the Rotterdam Rules. The latter is deleting the principle of overriding obligation related to carrier's obligation of seaworthiness in the Rotterdam Rules, the burden of proof being diverted from the carrier to the carrier and the shipper in the cargo damage caused by two factors(one for which the carrier was liable and the other for which it was excusable) in the new rules.

• 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.

• 한국항만경제학회지
• /
• 제22권2호
• /
• pp.83-108
• /
• 2006

Regarding the ocean carrier's responsibility for damage indemnification, both his or her duty of care and reason of legal exemption have been considered important. The International Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules relating to Bills of Lading also provides that the ocean carrier indemnifies for the loss or damage of freight on the basis of the principle of liability with fault. In other words, the carrier assumes responsibility only for the loss or damage of freight which is under his or her control and whose safety must be carefully maintained by him or her. The carrier's duty of care which is required for freight safety in accordance with the convention is associated with two themes, seaworthiness of vessel and freight itself. To make ocean freight shipping effective necessities the seaworthiness of the ship that will conduct the shipping service under its responsibility. This will ultimately lead to making the service impressive to the shipper as freight owner. Thus the purpose of this study is to contribute to more reasonable shipping by the shipowner or the carrier who needs to ensure seaworthiness of vessel, and prevent unseaworthiness that may be incurred in accordance with freight characteristics. For the purpose, this paper reviewed the meaning of seaworthiness of vessel through a juridical approach to its causal relationship with ocean freight shipping.

• 항공우주정책ㆍ법학회지
• /
• 제18권
• /
• pp.9-39
• /
• 2003

프로펠러여객기 운항시대에 만들어졌던 국제항공운송인의 민사책임관계를 규정한 1992년의 바르샤바조약은 1955년의 헤이그 개정의정서, 1961년의 과다라하라조약, 1971년의 과테말라의정서 및 1975년의 몬트리올 제1, 제2, 제3및 제4의 정서 등 한개의 조약과 여섯 개의 의정서 등에 의하여 여러 차례 개정이 되었고 보완되면서 70여 년간 전세계를 지배하여 왔지만 오늘날 초음속(마하)으로 나르고 있는 제트여객기 운항시대에 적합하지 않아 "바르샤바조약체제" 상의 문제점이 많이 제기되어 왔다. 특히 시대에 뒤떨어진 "바르샤바조약체제" 는 2개의 조약과 여섯 개의 의정서로 매우 복잡하게 구성되어 있었으며 항공기사고로 인한 국제항공운송인의 손해배상사건에 있어 배상한도액이 유한책임으로 규정되어 있어 항상 가해자인 항공사와 피해자인 여객들간에 분쟁(소송 등)이 끊이지 않고 있으므로 이를 어느정도 해결하기 위하여 UN산하 ICAO에서는 상기 여러 개 조약과 의정서를 하나의 조약으로 통합(integration)하여 단순화시키고 현대화(modernization)시키기 위하여 20여 년간의 작업 끝에 1999년 5월에 몬트리올에서 새로운 국제항공운송인의 민사책임에 관한 조약(몬트리올 조약)을 제정하였다. "바르샤바조약체제" 를 근본적으로 개혁한 몬트리올 조약은 71개국과 유럽통합지역기구가 서명하였으며 미국을 비롯하여 33개국이 비준하여 2003년 11월 3일부터 전세계적으로 발효되었음으로 이 조약은 앞으로 전세계의 항공운소업계를 지배하게 되리라고 본다. 본 논문에서는 몬트리올 조약의 성립경위와 주요내용(국제항공여객운송인의 손해배상책임: (1)총설, (2)조약의 명칭, (3)조약의 전문, (4)국제항공여객에 대한 책임원칙과 배상액((ㄱ)국제항공여객의 사상에 대한 배상, (ㄴ)국제항공여객의 연착에 대한 배상), (5)손해배상 한도액의 자동조정, (6)손해배상금의 일부전도, (7)손해배상청구소송의 제기관계, (8)국제항공여객의 주거지에서의 재판관할관계, (9)항공계약운송인과 항공실제운송인과의 관계, (10)항공보험)을 요약하여 간략하게 설명하였다. 1999년 몬트리올 조약의 핵심사항은 국제항공운송인의 손해배상책임에 관하여 무한책임을 원칙으로 하되 100,000 SDR까지는 무과실책임주의를 채택하였고 이 금액을 초과하는 부분에 대하여서는 과실추정책임주의를 채택하였음으로 "2단계의 책임제도" 를 도입한 점과 항공기사고로 인한 피해자(여객)는 주소지의 관할법원에 가해자(항공사)를 상대로 손해배상청구소송을 제기할 수 있는 제 5재판관할권을 새로이 도입하였다는 점이다. 현재 우리 나라는 전세계에서 항공여객수송량이 11위 권에 접어들고 있으며 항공화물수송량도 3위 권을 차지하고 있음에도 불구하고 아직도 이 조약에 서명 내지 비준을 하지 않고 있음은 문제점으로 지적될 수가 있음으로 그 해결방안으로 세계의 항공산업선진국들과 어깨를 나란히 하고 상호 협력하기 위하여 조속히 우리 나라도 이 조약에 서명하고 비준하는 것이 필요하다고 본다. 한편 우리 나라와 일본은 국내항공운송에 있어서는 국내에서 항공기사고가 발생하였을 때에 국내항공여객운송인의 민사책임을 규정한 법률이 없기 때문에 항상 항공사 측과 피해자간에 책임원인과 한계 및 손해배상액을 놓고 분규가 심화되어 가고있으며 법원에서 소송이 몇 년씩 걸리어 피해자 보호에 만전을 기 할 수가 없는 실정에 있다. 현재 이와 같은 분규의 신속한 해결을 위하여 국내항공운송약관과 민상법의 규정을 적용 내지 준용하여 처리할 수밖에 없는 실정인데 항공기사고의 특수성을 고려하여 볼 때 여러 가지 문제점이 많이 제기되고 있다. 이와 같은 문제점을 해결하기 위하여 국내항공여객운송인의 책임한계 및 손해배상액을 분명하게 정하고 재판의 공평성과 신속성을 도모하기 위하여서는 항공운송계약 당사자간의 책임관계를 명확하게 규정한 "가칭, 항공운송법" 의 국내입법이 절실히 필요하다고 본다.