• International Journal of Human Ecology
• /
• v.6 no.2
• /
• pp.63-72
• /
• 2005

This paper considered the impact of changing the product liability rule from consumer to producer liability on product safety under asymmetric information. In particular, it has been attempted to remove several constraints on antecedent studies. The main results of the study are as follows: under the misperception of the risk on a product, consumers may underestimate the probability of product failure. In this case, the accident rate can be lowered under the producer's liability rule. However, even under the asymmetric information, a consumer's estimation on the probability may be converged with the expected risk level, which could be called the 'rational expectation.' In this situation the probability of product failure can be lowered under the strict liability with contributory negligence. Additionally, it is possible to reduce the probability of product failure when a legal rule that imposes liability on cheapest cost avoider is admitted.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.37
• /
• pp.35-59
• /
• 2008

In most products liability cases, the only or principal defendant is the manufacturer that designed, manufactured, and marketed the product which injured the plaintiff. In this regards, most national laws and international convention stipulates the definition of the producer. But there is no rule about the definition of the producer in China. Yet parties in the product distribution chain other than ordinary manufacturers, notably retail seller, often profit from moving products from factories to consumers and so may bear some responsibility when product hazards injure consumers. The purpose of this paper is to clarify the definition of the "producer", "seller" who is responsible for products liability claims in China. This paper will contributes to help the Korean exporters, manufacturers to build up the proper countermeasures regarding products liability in China.

• Journal of Korean Society for Quality Management
• /
• v.47 no.3
• /
• pp.509-522
• /
• 2019

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to analyze how the writing rules of the product user guide affect consumers' understanding of products and the prevention of product accidents. Methods: We surveyed consumers to see how the writing rules of the product user guide help consumers to understand products and prevent product accidents. Results: We derived the importance, necessity, usability, and readability of the principle of making product manuals through analysis of previous research. Usability is the writing rule of the product user guide that the consumer has the most influence on the understanding of product use and the product accident. Conclusion: It is necessary to make product user guide so that consumers can understand the function and safety of products by using video and various image media. Also, It is the obligation to explain all stages of the product and to communicate through the product user guide how to prevent the product accident step by step.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.17 no.2
• /
• pp.3-28
• /
• 2016

While product liability has been settled as a technical term in civil law, criminal law does not commonly accept technical term for it. Not like civil law, product liability in criminal law point outs individual responsibility and disability of normative order. Meaning that causation between individual's action of violation of duty and the result of danger of legal interest or infringement of legal interest must be proved. In criminal law excluding "non-result-constituted crimes (Unternehmensdelikt)", charge of injuring, accidental infliction of injury, homicide or involuntary manslaughter is problematic in product liability. Of course, it is necessary to distinguish whether the action related to the outcome is act or ommission. Also the causal relationship between the action and the result must be proved, and the intention or negligence should be recognized. In this paper, it analyzes cases that were problematic in Korea, Germany, Spain, etc. Mainly focusing on the problems revealed in the determination of causal relationship, especially recognizing criminal liability related to products. Furthermore it is followed by the view of reviewing the cause-and-effect relationship by 2 steps, dividing natural scientific causation and the normative causal relationship. In this process, to acknowledge criminal product liability in accordance with recognizing cause-and-effect relationship, there should be general risk of specific substance causing the outcome. This only premise can be meaningful to examine the casual relationship from specific cases. As it shows in some cases and theories, it is not contradicting general law of cause and effect by determining specific causal relationship by free evaluation of evidence if a general causal relationship does not exist. Also since judge's testimony does not hold a dominant position from rule of thumb, it is possible to recognize specific causal relationship. However this paper takes position that if there is no objective and reasonably undeniable cause and effect law. If there is no objective and reasonably undeniable causal law, which is the premise for recognizing concrete causal relations, judge should sentence guilty according to "in dubio pro reo" principle. In addition, it is not allowed for the defendant to burden unproven fact by free evaluation of evidence which has an effect of shift of burden of proof.