지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
According to present civil law, torts is applied based on the principle ofresponsibility by negligence, and thus risk responsibility is being introducedexceptionally. Risk responsibility is considered as legislative counteractionfor the victim protection needs that have grown ever in the course of hightech industrialization in the 19th through 20th century throughout the world.
In such a context, new establishment of general provision for riskresponsibility was asserted in the discussion of revision of civil law in 1995.
About the assertion, proponents maintained that establishment of special lawmay involve such potentials like delay of protection and backwardness ofnational consciousness on facility or risk of substance, and reliance onspecial law may increase the problem of equitability among businesses, butallow for presence of businesses that may not take advantage of thelegislation. On the contrary, opponents emphasized that no generalprovisions exist even in other countries that have many special laws on riskresponsibility. Also in the 2004 revision discussion, new establishment ofgeneral provisions on risk responsibility was discussed, but it wasdetermined that the issue shall be excluded from revision.
Regarding the new establishment of general provisions of riskresponsibilities, it remains a question whether to maintain the classicalformula to approach the issue by weighing the advantages by the operationof risk facility and the disadvantages by realization of risk. Newestablishment of general provisions of risk responsibility can be supported only if the ideological changes in the responsibility of deficit indemnity fromthe past are recognized. Later on the issue of indemnity responsibility fordeficit shall not be considered content, only indemnifying the deficit uponrecognizing the fact that the deficit was caused by intention. There areclearly areas where offender may distribute the deficit of particular personsocially through taxation of indemnity amount, pricing structure or otherliability insurance etc by attributing the negligence to the offender. It ismore desirable to distribute the disadvantage by the deficit by risk facilitywith social value socially than to let a particular victim undertake suchdeficit. In such perspective, in case general provisions on risk responsibilityare newly established, the general requirements for offender's responsibilityfor risk should include provisions on the capability to distribute deficits aswell as to create risk.
목차
등록된 정보가 없습니다.
참고문헌 (65)
참고문헌 신청
이 논문의 저자 정보
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0