메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
저널정보
민사법의 이론과 실무학회 민사법의 이론과 실무 민사법의 이론과 실무 제15권 제2호
발행연도
2012.1
수록면
47 - 84 (38page)

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
If a victim suicides after injurer's tort, injurer should compensate him for damages due to his suicide. In generally speaking, there is no reasons to compensate for the damages, Because Suicide is taken by victim's choice. If his suicide stem from physical or mental hurt and he have no choice but to day, it should be compensated for his death. It is natural that assailant compensate him for damages, if victim's suicides spring from his tort. But what means "spring from his tort"? Korean Supreme Court say that it decided from viewpoint of 'justice and fairness'. But the conception of 'justice and fairness' is too ambiguous to restrict personal liability. It is necessary to decide according to relevant degree of 'riskiness of suicide and result of prevenient tort'. Korea Civil Code prescribe that the scope of damages due to other person's tort is restricted by obligee's probability of foreseeability. But the substantive enactment is not applied in the damages suit of tort, because a large number of tort arise from carelessness and negligence person cannot foresee the victim's damage. Only person committing intentional tort is responsible for damages without relevant degree of 'riskiness of suicide and result of prevenient tort'. The reduction of damages is decided by considering suicide and his member of family.

목차

등록된 정보가 없습니다.

참고문헌 (38)

참고문헌 신청

이 논문의 저자 정보

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0