• Proceedings of the Korean Society of Computer Information Conference
• /
• 2014.01a
• /
• pp.165-168
• /
• 2014

채권자대위권은 채권자가 자기의 채권을 보전하기 위하여 채무자에 속하는 권리를 행사할 수 있는 권리이다(민법제404조). 채무자의 권리는 채무자가 행사함이 원칙이나 채무자가 제3채무자에 대한 권리를 행사하지 아니함으로 채무자의 책임재산을 제대로 보전하지 않아 총채권자의 공동담보에 부족한 부분이 생길 때에는 채권자로 하여금 채무자의 권리를 행사하여 책임재산의 보전을 꾀할 수 있도록 할 필요가 있고, 이러한 목적을 위한 제도가 바로 채권자대위권제도이다. 그러나 채권자대위권제도는 채권자 취소권에 비해 상대적으로 주목받지 못하고 있는 것이 현실이다. 즉 실제와 현행민법 규정사이에 커다란 괴리가 존재하고 있고, 행사의 범위, 효과에 관한 규정을 두고 있지 않고 있다. 이는 전적으로 학설과 판례에 위임되어 있는 실정이므로 따라서 본 논문에서는 채권자대위권에 관한 문제점을 검토해보고, 정확한 명문규정이나 제도적 장치를 마련하는 제도의 취지 및 목적에 합당할 수 있도록 합리적인 방안을 제시하고자 한다.

• Journal of Digital Convergence
• /
• v.9 no.5
• /
• pp.11-20
• /
• 2011

Internet users and copyright holder have been at the center of a severe legal dispute because file-sharing soft (P2P) through Napster aggravates the violation of copyright as well as takes on the world. Though it is natural that we should hold users a criminal penalty for the illegal use of various computer programs, I think that if the supply of a computer program is generally within a circle of development act, program developer ought not to hold users criminally liable for the unintended illegal act of users. Two main issues are addressed in this work: (i) the basis and validity of legal responsibility and condemnation that appear in the precedent set as to P2P in America, Japan, and Korea. (ii) the necessity of both scientific technology development and efficient legal regulation of copyright holder. For this purpose, software development and legal regulation are reviewed analyzed from viewpoint of the criminal law.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.23 no.2
• /
• pp.171-209
• /
• 2022

There were also many medical-related rulings in 2021, among which the rulings reviewed in this paper are as follows. The first relates to a case in which the medical record, which is the primary judgment data regarding the presence or absence of medical negligence, has been modified. The court judged whether there was negligence on the basis of the first written medical record without considering the contents of the medical record that was later modified. Next, the ruling on the case of asking for liability for damages for prescription of anti-obesity drugs recognized negligence related to prescription, but denied liability for property damage by denying a causal relationship, and recognized only alimony for violation of the duty of explanation. The a full-bench ruling on the scope of subrogation of the National Health Insurance Corporation, which subrogates the claims for compensation for medical expenses against the perpetrator of the patient, changed the existing precedent that had taken the 'deduction method after offsetting negligence' and judged it as 'the method of offsetting negligence after deduction'. In addition, in the ruling on whether or not there was negligence, the court was not bound by the medical record appraisal result. Lastly, in relation to the National Health Insurance Service's disposition of reimbursement for medical care benefit costs, we reviewed the ruling that discretion should be exercised even when a non-medical person makes a refund to a medical institution opened by a non-medical person. And we also reviewed the ruling that the scope of reimbursement for medical institutions jointly using facilities and manpower specifically should be determined.

• The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
• /
• v.21 no.8
• /
• pp.305-314
• /
• 2021

According to the recent judgment of Supreme Court, in case when the National Health Insurance Service pays the insurance to a victim of torts, and then subrogate the victim's claim for damages, the scope of institution's subrogation should be limited to the amount of the assailant's responsibility rate of the institution charge, and the amount of compensation claimed by the victim to the assailant should be calculated in the method of contributory negligence after deduction. The court has judged that the institution could subrogate the whole amount of institution charge in the limit of assailant's damages, and the method of deduction after contributory negligence should be applied when calculating the assailant's damages to the victim. Supreme Court decision is greatly significant in the aspect of harmonizing the nature of health insurance as property right and social insurance as the beneficiaries could get additional supplement, and also seeking the balance between insurer and beneficiary. With the changed legal principles of Supreme Court in the scope of institution subrogation like this, the necessities to complement the litigation relation, legislation, and institution were suggested.

• Journal of Digital Convergence
• /
• v.14 no.6
• /
• pp.51-60
• /
• 2016

The modern state has always followed a variety of risks in the industrialization and informatization trends in the development of science and technology. Under such an environment, A matter of State compensation should take into consideration a variety of values such as harmony relief victims' rights in accordance with the principles of the rule of law, suppression of illegal acts of public servants, ensuring stable performance of official duties, the national treasury stability. As the state takes responsibility for an act of a public servant in a modern constitutional state, there may be a doubt on that the state takes responsibility only when there is a deliberation or a mistake. According to the theory of the self-responsibility, which suits the Constitution, the principle of liability with mistake on the State Compensation Law shall be excluded. I agree to the opinion that a subjective responsibility prerequisite such as a deliberation or a mistake is not required in relation to the liability of reparation on the State Compensation Law. Therefore, it is needed to convert the principle of state liability of reparation from the principle of liability with mistake to the principle of liability without mistake through a fundamental revision of the State Compensation Law.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.16 no.2
• /
• pp.87-130
• /
• 2015

In a case in which National Health Insurance Corporation (NHIC) pays medical care expenses to a victim of a traffic accident resulting in injury or death and asks the assailant for compensation of its share in the medical care expenses, as the precedent treats the subrogation of a claim set by National Health Insurance Act the same as that set by Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act, it draws the range of its compensation from the range of deduction, according to the principle of deduction after offsetting and acknowledges the compensation of all medical care expenses borne by the NHIC, within the amount of compensation claimed by the victim. However, both the National Health Insurance Act and the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act are laws that regulate social insurance, but medical care expenses in the National Health Insurance Act have a character of 'an underinsurance that fixes the ratio of indemnification,' while insurance benefit on the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act has a character of full insurance, or focuses on helping the insured that suffered an industrial accident lead a life, approximate to that in the past, regardless of the amount of damages according to its character of social insurance. Therefore, there is no reason to treat the subrogation of a claim on the National Health Insurance Act the same as that on the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act. Since the insured loses the right of claim acquired by the insurer by subrogation in return for receiving a receipt, there is no benefit from receiving insurance in the range. Thus, in a suit in which the insured seeks compensation for damages from the assailant, there is no room for the application of the legal principle of offset of profits and losses, and the range of subrogation of a claim or the amount of deduction from compensation should be decided by the contract between the persons directly involved or a related law. Therefore, it is not reasonable that the precedent draws the range of the NHIC's compensation from the principle of deduction after offsetting. To interpret Clause 1, Article 58 of the National Health Insurance Act that sets the range of the NHIC's compensation uniformly and systematically in combination with Clause 2 of the same article that sets the range of exemption, if the compensation is made first, it is reasonable to fix the range of the NHIC's compensation by multiplying the medical care expenses paid by the ratio of the assailant's liability. This is contrasted with the range of the Korea Labor Welfare Corporation's compensation which covers the total amount of the claim of the insured within the insurance benefit paid in the interpretation of Clauses 1 and 2, Article 87 of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act. In the meantime, there are doubts about why the profit should be deducted from the amount of compensation claimed, though it is enough for the principle of deduction after offsetting that the precedent took as the premise in judging the range of the NHIC's compensation to deduct the profit made by the victim from the amount of damages, so as to achieve the goal of not attributing profit more than the amount of damage to a victim; whether it is reasonable to attribute all the profit made by the victim to the assailant, while the damages suffered by the victim are distributed fairly; and whether there is concrete validity in actual cases. Therefore, the legal principle of the precedent concerning the range of the NHIC's compensation and the legal principle of the precedent following the principle of deduction after offsetting should be reconsidered.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.31 no.1
• /
• pp.3-36
• /
• 2016

Recently, the Supreme Court of Korea delivered a milestone judgment about air related multimodal transport. At there, the mattered cargo, some expensive jewellery, was transported from Qingdao, China to downtown office of consignee at Seoul via Incheon airport in Korea. As an air waybill was issued in this case, there was an air transport agreement between consignor and air courier operator. After arriving at Incheon airport, the shipment was transport by land arranged by the air courier operator, who was a defendant in this case. Upon arriving at the final destination, it was found that the jewellery was lost partly and based on circumstantial evidence, the damage presumed to be occurred during the land transport. As a subrogee, the insurance company who paid for consignee filed an action against the air courier operator for damage compensation. Defendant contended that Montreal convention should be applicable in this case mainly for limited liability. The lower court of this case confirmed that applying the limited liability clause under Montreal Convention is improper under the reason that the damage in this case was or presumed to be occurred during surface transport. It was focused on the Montreal Convention article 18 which says that the period of the carriage by air does not extend to any carriage by land, by sea or by inland waterway performed outside an airport. However, the Supreme Court overturned the lower court's decision. The delivered opinion is that the terms of condition on the air waybill including limited liability clause should be prevailed in this case. It seems that the final judgment was considered the fact that the only contract made in this case was about air transport. This article is for analysis the above decisions from the perspective that it is distinguishable between a pure multimodal transport and an expanded air transport. The main idea of this article is that under the expanded air transport, any carriage by land, sea or inland waterway only for the performance of a contract for carriage by air, for the purpose of loading, delivery or transhipment is still within the scop of air transport.

• Journal of Korea Port Economic Association
• /
• v.30 no.4
• /
• pp.111-130
• /
• 2014

The article 742(2) of the Korean Commercial Code allowed the third party to invoke a direct action against the insurer under a liability insurance. Meanwhile, the owners of the vessel enter into the P&I Insurance Contract with the P&I Club to indemnify all kinds of liability or expenses involved in the operation of its vessel. However, the Rule Book under the P&I Insurance mostly included the Pay to be Paid Clause which precludes the third party's direct action. Recently, the Seoul Central District Court passed a judgement on the validity of the Pay to be Paid Clause under the Korean law against the third party i.e. the cargo insurer having the right of subrogation. The court held that (1) the third party's right of direct action is not the right to claim insurance money but the right to claim damages against the P&I Club, (2) the insurer under a liability insurance is deemed to assume liability jointly and severally with the insured against the third party, (3) the Article 742(2) of the Korean Commercial Code is considered as a compulsory provision because it was invented to protect the innocent third party, the Paid to be Paid Clause is thus null and void. The purpose of this article is to evaluate the appropriateness of this court's judgments by comparative analysis of Korean and English law, and to suggest the relevant amendments of the Korean Commercial Code in order to prevent further legal disputes. The article criticizes the decision of the Seoul Central District Court, taking the attitude that, since the third party's right is the right to claim insurance money, the Paid to be Paid Clause is valid against the third party.