• The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
• /
• v.8 no.1
• /
• pp.39-47
• /
• 2008

These days American private security industries has rapidly grown, and its scales(employment, expenditures) exceed the public police. American private security are based on the theories such as privatization, co-production, and build more developmental framework. But the behind of private security, its civil and criminal liabilities are more issued. In this, among the civil liabilities focused on the tort liability. In civil liabilities, contract liability is specially raised by between contractors, on the other hand tort liability is raised in general without special relationship in civil law relations. In this study, I would observe the types, conditions, protest reasons and the cases in tort generated by private security officials.

• 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.77
• /
• pp.285-304
• /
• 2018

With the development of market economy, it has been a legislative trend to establish a system for vicarious liability of employers. China also established Tort Liability Law of People's Republic of China in 2009 and ruled responsibility of the employers for the acts for their employees through Art. 35. First, the employer's right to indemnity to an employee should be recognized, because employer's superintendence is much weak and economic power is similar between them. Second, an employer should take a responsibility for an unpaid employee as vicarious liability, because the Law did not exclude them from employees. Lastly, in case the Law conflicts with Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Certain Issues Concerning the Application of Law in Trying Cases Involving Compensation for Personal Damage, the Law should be regarded it has priority based on several related Principles. Regarding these matters, this study guides you to an analysis of vicarious liability of employers in China, benefits with a view to the perfection of the vicarious liability regime.

• 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.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.64
• /
• pp.155-185
• /
• 2014

Liability for the manufacture or supply of defective products can arise in two principle ways, in tort and in contract. English law has long regarded shipbuilding contract as agreement for the sale and purchase of goods. The consequence of which is that unless the Buyer and Builder agree otherwise, terms will automatically be implied into the contract between them as to the quality and performance of the completed vessel. The same principle applies to sub-contracts allied to the shipbuilding contract. On the other hand, one case decisions established that ".... a contract to build a ship, though a contract of sale of goods, has also some characteristics of a building contract", Recently the liability of a manufacturer in tort for physical damage i.e. personal injury and damage to property other than alleged to be defective is now well settled in most countries. Accordingly the Builder may face third party claims in tort more regularly than they have in the past, if the statutory implied terms have not been expressly excluded in contract. In such circumstances, it is necessary for the Builder to be prepared with counter measures to secure the stability of the vessel from its design development, building process, delivery and operation etc. The purpose of this paper is, from the case of "MSC Carla", to review product liability, jurisdiction and the initial date of extinctive prescription, then to suggest counter measures to the Builder.

• Journal of Navigation and Port Research
• /
• v.46 no.2
• /
• pp.99-109
• /
• 2022

A report released by the Chinese Maritime Court found that the natural environment and other objective factors have greatly reduced the risk of ship collision accidents with the advancement of technologies. However, collisions between merchant ships and fishing boats occur frequently along the coast during fishing seasons, which should be highly valued. International conventions and domestic legislation in China comprise detailed laws with respect to ship collisions, but the theory of ship collision infringement needs to be improved, enriched, and developed. Meanwhile, the development of the tort liability law provides theoretical support for ship collision infringement. As far as China's ship tort legal system is concerned, the research on ship collision tort damage compensation is relatively extensive, and the constitutive elements and causality of ship collision tort liability have also been studied in depth. The purpose of this paper is to explore the domestic legislation applicable to disputes related to ship collisions in China. As these laws are unclear on the resolution of disputes resulting from ship collisions, significant attention has been focused on the final judgments by the Supreme Court of China (SPC), as well as the judicial judgments set by the Maritime Court of China.

• Proceedings of KOSOMES biannual meeting
• /
• 2017.11a
• /
• pp.201-201
• /
• 2017

• Journal of Fisheries and Marine Sciences Education
• /
• v.26 no.5
• /
• pp.959-965
• /
• 2014

Transporting of live fish requires subcontract with an independent contractor. During the transporting of live fish, civil liability problems can be caused by damage of fish. Before transporting of live fish, responsibility of negligence and tort liability were arisen, after transporting of live fish, default on an obligation was arisen. To avoid this problems, it is important to put a bond on each other and live fish transporting contract can be made a legal contract. Also, transporting of live fish must be made safe, after transporting, and discharge of obligation, perfect transaction is achieved.

• Korean Security Journal
• /
• no.8
• /
• pp.1-26
• /
• 2004

The current consitutional law 29-1 is ordaining the State Tort Liability for the illegal action of public service personnel. Based on this regulation, the State Tort Liability Act 2-1 actualizes by indicating, the nation or the local self-governing community is responsible for the public service personnels damaging others during their office hours whether it is accidental or intentional. However, the same law is considered to be inappropriate for the damage relief. In order to supplement this problem, through examinations at both theoretical and systematic levels of Prima facie as well as the objectification and standardization of the damages are required for the national compensation for the police action. According to the objectification and standardization of the damage theory, the faulty actions of the public service personnel are the defects occurred during the office hours. In the case of the police action that frequently uses infringement administration, invading the liberty and rights of the people, it is necessary to interpret faulty damages during the office duties more comprehensively so as to extend its scope of the ordinary public service personnel accidental illegality. In order to warrant effectiveness of the securing the rights, it is crucial to distinguish whether the faulty actions are accidental or intentional. When proven to be damages by illegal police action, the police personnel is responsible for the faults, called Prima facie, the nation is liable for the damage relief.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.12 no.1
• /
• pp.227-255
• /
• 2011

Recently, many nations said "yes" to human embryonic stem cell research, signing an executive order to permit funding for the research in the mame of achieving health and life of humankind. Human Embryo Research is permitted by our Bioethics & Biosafety Act. But, illegal research cannot be divorced from civil liability since it requires the destruction of eggs of fertilized eggs and personal rights of embryo-creator. After all, though we allow to do research embryo, we should control the capacity of abuse of embryo research for embryo-creator. If research violate the law(Bioethics & Biosafety Act or Civil Law, etc), it comes to a delict by pecuniary loss and non-pecuniary loss. When it comes to pecuniary loss, Human Embryo is not body but special property. Supreme Court maintained a stance that mental suffering is generally deemed as compensable for damages for the loss of property where a person's property right is invaded by a tort or non-performance of obligation. Thus, where mental suffering occurs, which cannot be compensated by recovery of property losses, the situation must be a special circumstance and the injured could claim consolation money for such losses only if the offender knew or would have known of such special circumstances(Supreme Court Decision 96Da31574 delivered on Nov, 26, 1996, etc.). That is to say, Supreme Court regards mental suffering through person's property right invaded by a tort as damages that have arisen through special circumstances. According to Civil law article 393 (2), the injured could claim consolation money for such losses only if only if the offender had foreseen or could have foreseen such circumstances. Also our court will solve through damages for non-pecuniary loss by complementary function of consolation money in that pecuniary loss could be difficult to valuate.