지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
In these days, the advancement of information technology as well as complication or diversification of the society often entails cases that infringes on the emotional peace of others through the daily life, whether with intention or negligence.
In the past the emotional peace of an individual has not been conceived as an independent subject for protection but rather protected as an accessory to other exclusive rights. However, the recent change of society has led us to a situation where not only an objective value of an individual like honor is to be protected, but also the emotional peace of an individual is encouraged to be the subject of protection.
And yet, since article 750 of the Civil Code is only introducing a liability system for general torts, the question on which particular case may the emotional peace of an individual could be protected under the existing torts system remains unclear. Also, it must be said that its specific forms and requirements under which may be treated as of torts are mainly defined by the case law.
In relation to the above issue, it is clear that the privacy torts is being covered by article 17 of the Constitutional Law, but still the specific forms and requirements within the civil context is obscure. In particular, the question on whether it is possible to protect the emotional peace of an individual itself or not is unclear, and though in the U.S. certain forms of this kind of torts is generally accepted, its concept is still developing and its ultimate limit has not been decided. Therefore, in this study the author suggests the specific forms and requirements which lead to torts that infringes on the emotional peace of an individual, with an end to cope with torts that violates the individual’s emotional peace in an appropriate way, by referring to relevant legislation and case law of other States.
In the past the emotional peace of an individual has not been conceived as an independent subject for protection but rather protected as an accessory to other exclusive rights. However, the recent change of society has led us to a situation where not only an objective value of an individual like honor is to be protected, but also the emotional peace of an individual is encouraged to be the subject of protection.
And yet, since article 750 of the Civil Code is only introducing a liability system for general torts, the question on which particular case may the emotional peace of an individual could be protected under the existing torts system remains unclear. Also, it must be said that its specific forms and requirements under which may be treated as of torts are mainly defined by the case law.
In relation to the above issue, it is clear that the privacy torts is being covered by article 17 of the Constitutional Law, but still the specific forms and requirements within the civil context is obscure. In particular, the question on whether it is possible to protect the emotional peace of an individual itself or not is unclear, and though in the U.S. certain forms of this kind of torts is generally accepted, its concept is still developing and its ultimate limit has not been decided. Therefore, in this study the author suggests the specific forms and requirements which lead to torts that infringes on the emotional peace of an individual, with an end to cope with torts that violates the individual’s emotional peace in an appropriate way, by referring to relevant legislation and case law of other States.
목차
Ⅰ. 서론
Ⅱ. 개인의 감정적 평온에 관한 외국의 동향
Ⅲ. 개인의 감정적 평온에 관한 불법행위의 유형과 성립요건
Ⅳ. 결론
【참고문헌】
【Zusammenfassung】
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청이 논문과 연관된 판례 (1)
-
대법원 1998. 5. 8. 선고 97다34563 판결
[1] 방송 등 언론매체가 사실을 적시하여 개인의 명예를 훼손하는 행위를 한 경우에도 그 목적이 오로지 공공의 이익을 위한 것일 때에는 적시된 사실이 진실이라는 증명이 있거나 그 증명이 없다 하더라도 행위자가 그것을 진실이라고 믿었고 또 그렇게 믿을 상당한 이유가 있으면 위법성이 없다고 보아야 할 것이나, 그에 대한 입증책임은 어디까지나
자세히 보기
함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
中国民法典中关于侵权责任的规定和变化
원광법학
2020 .01
-
정조의 평화사상: 탕평과 활법을 중심으로
통일과 평화
2018 .01
-
해고제한의 법리로서 불법행위이론: 미국의 공공정책 불법행위 이론을 중심으로
기업법연구
2004 .06
-
It Takes Three to Make a Korean Peace
Global Asia
2019 .06
-
EU 불법행위법 통일 논의와 동아시아에서의 통일 모색
재산법연구
2010 .01
-
未成年者의 不法行爲에 대한 監督者의 賠償責任
중앙법학
2015 .03
-
남한과 북한의 평화통합을 위한 교류협력에 관한 연구
한국사회정책
2005 .12
-
Defining Peace: Peace vs. Security
The Korean Journal of Defense Analysis
2004 .01
-
평화문화와 지속가능한 평화 : 한국에서의 의미와 과제
문화와 정치
2018 .06
-
현대 불법행위법의 동향과 민법상 불법행위법의 문제점
법학연구
2010 .06
-
EU 통합 불법행위법 동향
외법논집
2006 .01
-
我國的媒体侵權責任与体媒權利保護 : 兼为媒体侵权责任法理论和实践辩解
비교사법
2012 .11
-
지적재산법상 보호되지 아니하는 지적성과물에 대한 무단 이용과 일반불법행위의 성부
저스티스
2012 .10
-
IN SEARCH OF PEACE ON THE SILK ROAD: FROM THEORY TO PRACTICE
Acta Via Serica
2017 .06
-
Peace in Korea : Next Steps
Global Asia
2018 .09
-
20세기 전환기 중국 평화담론 연구 ― “세계평화회의”를 중심으로
중국학논총
2018 .01
-
중국 불법행위법(침권책임법)의 주요 내용과 특징
재산법연구
2010 .01
-
평화경제론: 남북경제공동체 형성의 이론적 틀
통일정책연구
2006 .01
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2013-360-000705766