타인의 불법행위로 인한 태아의 손해배상 - 태아가 사망한 경우를 중심으로 -
Compensation for the Loss Which Is Caused by Illegal Behavior of the Others in the Fetus - focus on the case of fetus' death -
0
조회
0
다운로드
18
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Historically, common law courts and continent law did not permit wrongful death actions for injuries suffered in the fetus. The fetus must be born alive in order to acquire rights. This was because a fetus was considered a "single entity" with his or her mother. And the right ability of the fetus is originated from the Rome law, the ideology which the potential life right of the fetus be protected is not reflected in this law. But currently, there is guaranteed to protect a life of the fetus almost with like that of the person. Consequently, even though the fetus born dead in illegal behavior of the others, his or her right must be protected as against those who caused the death. Article 762. in the civil law must be interpreted as the special regulation of article 3. Courts generally must permit recovery of medical care and funeral and burial expenses, with some going further to permit recovery based on the parent's loss of a potential child's society or of the child's future earning capacity. Though courts have been increasingly open to permitting civil recoveries for the loss of an unborn child in American common law, but it could not be recognized to all fetuses. Because the certain period undergarment fetus is uncertain that he or she will be born alive or not. Consequently, when the fetus is born, positively the time which is the possibility of living is important. It is the fact that the court must decide it's period. But the duration of 7 months which an abortion is permitted in the mother and child hygienic law will become the good standard.
Abstract
Historically, common law courts and continent law did not permit wrongful death actions for injuries suffered in the fetus. The fetus must be born alive in order to acquire rights. This was because a fetus was considered a "single entity" with his or her mother. And the right ability of the fetus is originated from the Rome law, the ideology which the potential life right of the fetus be protected is not reflected in this law. But currently, there is guaranteed to protect a life of the fetus almost with like that of the person. Consequently, even though the fetus born dead in illegal behavior of the others, his or her right must be protected as against those who caused the death. Article 762. in the civil law must be interpreted as the special regulation of article 3. Courts generally must permit recovery of medical care and funeral and burial expenses, with some going further to permit recovery based on the parent's loss of a potential child's society or of the child's future earning capacity. Though courts have been increasingly open to permitting civil recoveries for the loss of an unborn child in American common law, but it could not be recognized to all fetuses. Because the certain period undergarment fetus is uncertain that he or she will be born alive or not. Consequently, when the fetus is born, positively the time which is the possibility of living is important. It is the fact that the court must decide it's period. But the duration of 7 months which an abortion is permitted in the mother and child hygienic law will become the good standard.
참고문헌 (40)
- 곽윤직, (2005), 박영사
- 곽윤직, (1992), 박영사
- 곽윤직, "민법총칙" (2005), 박영사
- 김영규, "분만중 태아가 사망한 경우의 손해배상액산정" (1997), 판례월보 320호
- 김정훈, "여성의 낙태권과 국가의 태아생명보호의무간 충돌 해결점", 법률신문 3552
- 김증한, "모체와 함께 사망한 태아의 배상청구" (1978), 서울대학교 법학연구소
- 김천수, "태아의 법적지위", 비교사법, 10(2)통권 : 21 (2003)
- 김천수, "태아의 인권 내지 기본권으로서의 생명권-Williams의 부정론을 반박하면서-" (2005), 아세아여성법학
- 김형남, "미국헌법상 낙태 및 태아의 생명권에 대한 논의와 판례 분석", 미국 헌법연구, 16(1) (2005), (사)미국헌법학회
- 민법안심의록, "총칙편"
- 민법안심의록, "채권편"
- 박동진, "태아의 지위", JURIST plus, 통권 : 412, pp.240~243
- 박우동, "생명신체의 침해로 인한 손해배상액의 산정", 사법논집, 5, pp.177~216, 대법원 법원행정처
- 박준서, "주석민법, 책권각칙(8)" (2000), 한국사법행정학회
- 한국법제연구원, "국역 관습조사보고서(1992)", 1992
- 양창수, "태아의 권리능력", 고시연구, 15(6) (1988), 고시연구사
- 오상걸, "모자보건법(형법개정안 제135조)과 태아의 생명권", 변호사, 26, 서울지방변호사회
- 윤진수, "임신중절이 허용되지 않는 태아의 장애를 발견하지 못한 의사의 손해배상책임- 대법원 2002.6.25 선고 2001다66321판결을 중심으로(나산 서민교수정년기념논문집)" (2002), 법문사
- 이은영, "채권각론" (2002), 박영사
- 이준현, "가해자의 불법행위로 인한 태아의 손해배상청구권", 법학연구, 25 (2006), 전북대학교
- 이창현, "불법행위를 원인으로 한 비재산적 손해배상에 관한 비교법적 연구", 박사, pp.2008
- 이화숙, "태아의 법률상 지위(김형배교수화갑기념논문집)", pp.96~126 (1994), 박영사
- 정연철, "태아의 권리와 모체에 대한 고찰", 동의법학, 19 (2003), 동의대학교 법정연구소
- 황적인, "로마법ㆍ서양법제사" (1983), 박영사
- 현승종, "게르만법" (1989), 박영사
- 谷口知平, "佛蘭西民法(I)-人事法 後刻版" (1988), 有斐閣
- 谷口知平ㆍ石田喜久夫, "新版 註釋民法(1) 總則(1)" (2002), 有斐閣
- 大嶋芳樹, "胎兒死亡の慰藉料", 判例タイムズ 臨時增刊, 51(20) (2000), 判例タイムズ社
- 木村健助, "佛蘭西民法(II)-財産取得法(1) 後刻版" (1988), 有斐閣
- 小橋一郞 譯, "サヴィニ-現代 ロ-マ法體系" (1996), 成文堂
- 柴田光藏, "ロ-マ私法槪說" (1979), 創文社
- Abrahan Unger, "Right to recover for injury form negligence before birth", Guild Rev, 12, pp.48~49 (1952)
- Chase, "Liability for Prenatal Injuries" (1971)
- F.Stone, "the unborn child and the law of tort", pp.55~63 (1978), Cambrian L. Rev
- Gitter, M?nchKomm, "Aufl", pp.71~79
- Joseph A. Nickleach, "Torts-Death-Right to recover for death of a stillborn fetus", Duquesne University Law Review, 3, pp.114~117
- Jost, Timothy Stoltzfus, "Rights of Embryo and Foetus in Private Law", The American journal of comparative law, 50(3), pp.633~646 (2002)
- Olive M.Stone, "Family Law" (1977)
- Shapiro, "Annotation, Right to Maintain Action or to Recover Damages for Death of Unborn Child" (1974)
- Timothy Stoltzfus Jost, "Right of Embryo and Foetus in Private Law", pp.633~646, Am. J. Comp. L.