미국 제조물 보통법전집의 제조물 결함에 대한 고찰 - 민법의 관점에서 -

고세일 한국경영법률학회 2024 經營法律 Vol.34 No.2

미국법률협회(American Law Institute)가 제조물책임 보통법전집(The Restatement (Third) of Products Liability)을 마련한 뒤에 여러 국가에 제조물책임 법리에 대해서 많은 영향을 끼쳤다. 또한 현행 제조물책임법도 여러 측면에서 미국 제조물 보통법전집의 영향을 받았다. 이 논문에서는 제조물결함과 관련한 미국 제조물 보통법전집 제1조와 제2조를 중심으로, 해당 법리의 역사적 배경과 실제 운용하는 측면, 구체적인 사례에서 우리 법제에서 도움을 받을 수 있는 시사점을 찾고자 한다. 미국 제조물 보통법전집은 제조상 결함뿐만 아니라, 특히 설계상 결함과 표시상 결함에 대해서 다양한 관점을 제시한다. 그런 면에서 현행 제조물책임법이 적용될 때의 여러 기준과 요소에 대해서 제시하는 바가 크다. 본 논문은 크게 네 부분으로 구성된다. II에서는 제조물 결함에 따른 판매업자의 책임 법리를 살핀다. III에서는 제조물 결함의 종류에 따른 책임 법리와 여러 운영 요소를 고찰한다. IV에서는 미국 제조물 보통법전집에서 고찰한 내용을 중심으로 시사점을 제시하고, 본 논문에 결론을 맺는다. 미국 제조물책임 보통법전집은 무과실 책임으로 운영된다. 그러나 제조물책임 보통법전집 제1조와 제2조의 운영과 여러 가지 판단 요소를 살펴보면, 그 이면에서는 위험과 효용성이라는 합리성 판단을 하는 것을 알 수 있다. 따라서 무과실 책임이라는 원칙에서 출발하지만, 무과실 책임을 실제 운영하는 측면에서는 과실책임과 비슷한 측면의 합리성 기준으로 여러 요소와 함께 쓰고 있다는 것이다. 그런 면에서 제조물책임은 전적으로 무과실 책임은 아닌 것으로 평가할 수도 있다. 1998년에 만들어진 미국 제조물 보통법전집은 시대가 변화하면서 또 다른 전환점을 맞고 있다. 그것은 인공지능이 발달하면서, 인공지능 책임에 대한 근거로서 제조물책임을 부과하려는 시도가 그러하다. The American Law Institute’s The Restatement (Third) of Products Liability has had a profound impact on product liability in many countries. Current Korean product liability law has also been influenced in many ways by the Restatement (Third) of Products Liability. This article focuses on sections 1 and 2 of the U.S. Restatement (Third) of Products Liability, exploring the historical background of the Restatement, its practical application, and the implications for our legal system in specific cases. The Restatement (Third) of Products Liability offers a different perspective on not only manufacturing defects, but also design defects and inadequate instructions or warning defects. As such, it has a great deal to say about the different standards and elements of product liability law. This article is organized into four parts. Part II examines the law of sellers’ liability for defective products. Part III examines the law of liability and operative factors for different types of product defects. Part IV concludes with a discussion of the implications of the Restatement (Third) of Products Liability. The American product liability law operates under strict liability. However, an examination of the operation of sections 1 and 2 of the Restatement (Third) of Products Liability and the various elements of the test reveals that, behind the scenes, there is a rational test of risk and utility. Therefore, although it starts from the principle of strict liability, in terms of actual operation, strict liability is used as a standard of reasonableness similar to negligence, with various factors. In that sense, product liability can be characterized as not entirely strict liability. The 1998 Restatement of Products Liability in the United States is at another turning point as times have changed. As Artificial Intelligence have developed, many attempts to impose product liability as bases for AI liability. In this respect, the Restatement (Third) of Product Liability works in this new area as well.

미국 불법행위법의 구조와 내용에 대한 연구 - 보통법전집의 ‘과실’을 중심으로 -

고세일 한국민사법학회 2012 民事法學 Vol.59 No.-

In United States, there have been various sources of laws including positive laws. Further there have been various Restatements in which many members of American Law Institute have discussed and drafted. Although the Restatements may not be positive laws, they have worked similar functions as positive laws have done. Most of US law schools have used the Restatements as one of most important materials for their students’ education, and US courts have cited many provisions of the Restatements to make decisions in various civil cases. In this regard, this author has estimated that the Restatements would be a good guide to understand American law: structure and contents. Therefore this author has chosen the Restatements of Torts (Second) to show the foundation of current American Tort law, while focusing negligence as a founding part of American Tort law. In this aspect, this author attempts to explain principal provisions of negligence in US Restatements of Torts: mainly sections 281 through 328D. In II of this article, this author mentions history of american torts law prior to 19th century, and then explains history of the Restatement of Torts which was at birth in 20th. In III, this author refers to a general concept of negligence in the Restatements of Torts, while stating definition, requirements, criteria of negligence and standards of actor’s behaviors. In IV, this author explains various of negligent acts in the Restatements of Torts. Thus this author describes dangerous acts, danger of harms, and use of incomplete instruments, misrepresentations of physical harm, dangerous emotional distress, duties of affirmative action. In addition, this author explains burden of proof concerning negligent actions. In V, this author summarizes the contents of negligence provisions of the Restatements of Torts. Finally this author attempts to suggest what Korean Tort law, which has Civil Law tradition may be able to learn from the negligence provisions of the Restatement of Torts, which has Common Law tradition.

미국법상 위험부담 법리

고세일 한국재산법학회 2015 한국재산법학회 학술대회 자료집 Vol.2015 No.4

Is There a Role for Adjuvant Therapy in R0 Resected Gallbladder Cancer?: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

고세일,김영생,황인규,김은영,오성용,지준호,송하나,박세훈,박준오,강정훈 대한암학회 2016 Cancer Research and Treatment Vol.48 No.4

Purpose The purpose of this study is to assess the role of adjuvant therapy in stage I-III gallbladder cancer (GBC) patients who have undergone R0 resection. Materials and Methods Clinical data were collected on 441 consecutive patients who underwent R0 resection for stage I-III GBC. Eligible patients were classified into adjuvant therapy and surveillance only groups. Propensity score matching (PSM) between the two groups was performed, adjusting clinical factors. Results In total, 84 and 279 patients treated with adjuvant therapy and followed up with surveillance only, respectively, were included in the analysis. Before PSM, the 5-year relapse-free survival (RFS) rate was lower in the adjuvant therapy group than in the surveillance only group (50.8% vs. 74.8%, p < 0.001), although there was no statistically significant difference in the 5-year overall survival (OS) rate (66.2% vs. 79.5%, p=0.089). After the PSM, baseline characteristics became comparable and there were no differences in the 5-year RFS (50.8% vs. 64.8%, p=0.319) and OS (66.2% vs. 70.4%, p=0.703) rates between the two groups. Conclusion The results suggest that fluoropyrimidine-based adjuvant therapy is not indicated in stage I-III GBC patients who have undergone R0 resection.

교회공동체의 법 이해와 준수

고세일 기독교학문연구회 2023 신앙과 학문 Vol.28 No.1

When we think of laws in social communities, we may consider them as burdens to “do or not do.” Also, we might think of our social reality: “the rich are innocent, the poor are guilty.” This reality concerning laws might influence brothers’ and sisters’ perspectives of laws in church communities as well. However, ironically many laws in pre-modern and modern societies have come from Bible, the Word of God. If we look at laws in the Bible, there are law about the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil that God spoke to Adam and Eve, the Ten Commandments, and laws of God which God gave Israelites after God had saved them from Egypt in the Old Testament. In the New Testament, there are scenes in which Jesus criticizes the Pharisees concerning laws of God. In addition, the Apostle Paul provides two different views of laws of God. The present negative perspective of laws of God in church communities might be influenced by the Reformers or by misunderstanding their ideas. However, their slogan “by Faith alone,” is not contracting to laws of God. The contrasting opinions of laws and grace of God may come from misunderstanding of the entire Scriptures, especially the relationship between the Old and the New Testament. We can interpret laws and gospel of God with harmony. Particularly moral law of God can provide norms of practice in church communities. When we interpret laws of God in this way, we can restore the heart of the early churches in Acts 2:43-47. Also we can see and check laws of our world with laws of God. 사회공동체에 있는 사람이 ‘법’이라는 단어를 떠올리면, 보통 ‘유전무죄 무전유죄’라는 사회현실과 무언가를 하거나 하지 않아야 하는 부담으로 여긴다. 그러면 교회 공동체에 있는 그리스도인이 ‘법’ 을 좋지 않은 대상으로 바라보는지, 아니면 좋은 대상으로 바라보는지를 묻는다면, 그 대답은 사회 공동체에 있는 사람의 대답과 다르지 않을 것 같다. 현재 거의 모든 민법 교과서의 저자들은 권리주체로서 ‘비법인사단’을 설명하면서, ‘교회의 분열’에 대한 많은 법원의 판례를 소개한다. 이런 교회공동체의 판례 사안을 법의 눈으로 바라보면, 교회공동체는 법을 잘 지키는 공동체가 아니라고 여길 가능성이 있다. 이러한 문제는 교회 공동체가 하나님의 법에 대한 오해에서 나올 수 있다. 이런 측면에서 이 글은 이러한 문제가 어디에서 나오고 어떻게 해결할 수 있는지를 설명한다. 현대 사회의 많은 법은 근대 사회를 표본으로 한 것이고, 표본의 근간을 합리성에 둔다. 그런데 현재 쓰고 있는 여러 법 제도는 성경의 법에 근거를 둔다. 현대의 법이 하나님의 말씀인 성경에 근거한 것이다. 성경에서 법의 관점을 본다면, 구약성경에서 하나님이 아담과 하와에게 말씀하신 선과 악을 알게 하는 나무의 열매에 대한 법, 이스라엘 민족을 이집트에서 구해 내시고 주신 십계명과 모세를 통해서 주신 하나님의 법이 있다. 신약성경에서는 예수님이 바리새인들을 비판하시는 장면이 있고, 사도 바울이 하나님의 법을 바라보는 두 개의 시각을 제시한다. 교회 공동체에서 하나님의 법을 좋지 않게 보는 시각은 종교개혁자들의 영향 또는 종교개혁자들이 사고를 오해한 것에서 나왔다. 그러나 “오직 믿음으로”이라는 종교개혁의 구호도 하나님의 법과 대치되는 사고가 아니다. 하나님의 법과 은혜를 반대로 보는 시각은 성경 전체의 흐름을 놓치는 위험에 빠진다. 하나님의 법과 복음을 조화롭게 해석할 수 있다. 특히 법의 3중 구분에 따른 ‘도덕법’은 하나님의 성품에 관한 법으로서 우리에게 실천의 문제를 풀어나갈 수 있는 말씀이다. 이렇게 해석할 때, 사도행전 2:43-47의 초대 교회의 마음을 회복할 수 있다고 판단한다. 교회 공동체에서 하나님의 법을 올바로 바라보고, 삶의 실천으로 나아갈 때, 세상에 있는 여러 법도 하나님의 법의 시각으로 점검할 수 있다. 그렇게 나와 하나님, 나와 이웃, 나와 세상을 연결하고 주님이 부르신 그곳에서 예수 그리스도를 증거하는 삶을 살아가는 실천의 힘을 얻는다. 따라서 교회 공동체에서 하나님의 성품인 도덕법을 이해하고 삶에 있어서 중요한 실천 덕목의 방향으로 삼을 때 하나님의 법의 관점에서 세상의 법을 확인할 수 있는 힘을 갖는다. 이렇게 하나님의 법을 이해하고 세상을 섬길 때, 여러 민법 교과서에 있는 비법인사단인 교회 분열 문제도 해소할 수 있다.

정보화 시대 미국 근로자들의 사생활 보호

고세일 한국노동연구원 2005 국제노동브리프 Vol.3 No.11

불법행위의 예견가능성과 손해배상범위에 대한 연구 – 민법 제763조의 준용에 따른 민법 제393조의 해석문제 –

고세일 한국민사법학회 2014 民事法學 Vol.66 No.-

Historically the current Korean Civil Code has been succeeded by European Civil Codes, especially the German and French Civil Code through Japan. In aspect of non-performance and torts liability, Korea has imported general provisions, articles 390 and 750 of the Korean Civil Code from the French Civil Code. In the meanwhile the drafters had not enough time to make the Korean Civil Code, due to historical incidents. Therefore, there have been new provisions in the present Korean Civil Code for which interpretations have been difficult, because they had not been in the earlier Korean Civil Code. One of these tricky provision is article 763 of the Korean Civil Code, by which the article 393 (Scope of Damages in Non-performance) may be applicable by mutatis mutandis to tort claims. In this regard, drafters of the Korean Civil Code had attempted to treat the scope of tort damages as same as that of breach of contracts. However the provision which has treated scope of tort damages as same as that of non-performance, like the article 763 has hardly found in any other comparative laws. Therefore there have been controversies such as pros and cons of the current article 763. In this aspect, this author attempts to examine where the article 763 of the Korean Civil Code had come from in legal historical and comparative perspectives. This article has mainly six parts. In II, this author attempts to look into comparative examples of article 763 of the Korean Civil Code, and then explains the historical origin of the controversial provision. In III, this author studies English Hadley v. Baxendale, which has influenced the foreseeability rule in breach of contract world-widely. In IV, this author examines American Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad, which may be a historical starting point for the foreseeability rule of torts. In V. this author reviews provisions of foreseeability rules in American Restatements (Second and Third) of Torts. In VI, this author examines foreseeability rule of Principles of European Tort Law and Non-Contractual Liability Arising out of Damage Cause to Another in European perspective. Finally while summarizing foreseeability rules of Hadley, Palsgraf, American Torts Restatements, and European discussions, this author attempts to mention why mutatis mutandis of article 393 in article 763 of the Korean Civil Code may be abrogated and a new provision for scope of torts damages may be necessary.

Roman Iniuria and its influence on modern legal system - Is it a foundation of Right of Personality?

고세일 충남대학교 법학연구소 2007 法學硏究 Vol.18 No.2

운동경기에 참가하는 사람의 주의의무에 대한 고찰 : - 미국 법원의 운동경기에 참여한 사람의 주의의무 판단을 중심으로 -

고세일 忠南大學校 法學硏究所 2021 法學硏究 Vol.32 No.2

When participating in athletic games, there have been risks in which participants may be injured by activities of other participants. If normal injuries have occurred, the player may consider that he or she should bear his or her injuries. However, if severe injures have come in the course of sports activities, the circumstances would be different. The sports player would not willingly take his or her injures, if the harms have been beyond its ordinary expectation. Several media have reported the Supreme Court’s decision sentenced on January 31, 2019, 2017 Da203596, and the Korean public have paid attention to the Court’s ruling. The first trial and the Supreme Court concluded that the defendant was not responsible for the goalkeeper’s injuries. On the other hand, the second trial court ruled in favor of some of the injured soccer player. In this article, this author has examined the duty of care of those who have participated in sports games. This article was made up of all five. In II., this author has summarized the facts and court’s judgments and their legal grounds. In III., this author has sought to find “safety care duty,” in structure of obligations and to categorize the Korean Supreme Courts’ cases concerning the safety care duty. In IV., this author has studied US courts cases which have occurred in sports and recreation games for a comparative legal viewpoint of duty of care. In V., this author has summarized and attempt to provide directions for which we may need to look for. 운동경기에 참여할 때 크고 작은 부상의 위험이 있다. 작은 부상인 경우에는 놀다가 다친 것으로 여길 수 있다. 그렇기 때문에 참가자가 스스로 그 부담을 져야 한다는 인식이 있다. 그런데 운동경기에 참여하여, 예상하지 못한 큰 부상을 입을 때 상황이 달라진다. 참가자가 그런 큰 부상을 일으킨 상대방 참가자에게 손해배상책임을 묻고자 한다. 여러 언론이 대상 판결인 대법원 2019. 1. 31. 선고 2017다203596 판결을 보도했고, 일반인도 이 사안에 큰 관심을 가졌다. 1심과 대법원은 피고에게 책임이 없다는 점에서 결론을 같이 했다. 반면에 2심인 고등법원은 원고 일부 승소 판결을 내렸다. 이 글에서는 대상 판결을 중심으로 운동경기에 참가하는 사람의 주의의무를 살펴본다. 이 글은 모두 다섯 부분으로 이루어졌다. II.에서는 대상판결의 사실관계와 법원의 판단 내용을 살핀다. III.에서는 대상 판결이 운동경기에 참가하는 사람의 주의의무의 주된 논거로 삼는 ‘안전배려의무’의 뜻과 안전배려의무에 대한 여러 유형의 대법원 판례를 검토한다. IV.에서는 운동경기에 참여한 사람의 주의의무를 검토하기 위해서 운동경기에서 발생한 사안이 많은 미국 판례 내용을 고찰한다. V.에는 지금까지 내용을 정리하고, 시사점을 제시한다.

CD44 Variant 9 Serves as a Poor Prognostic Marker in Early Gastric Cancer, But Not in Advanced Gastric Cancer

고세일,고경혁,이원섭,김록범,이정희,정상호,이영준,홍순찬,하우송 대한암학회 2016 Cancer Research and Treatment Vol.48 No.1

Purpose The present study is to investigate the significance of CD44 variant 9 (CD44v9) expression as a biomarker in primary gastric cancer. Materials and Methods With various gastric tissues, we performed immunohistochemical staining for CD44v9. Results The positive expression rates for CD44v9 in tumor, including adenoma, early gastric cancer (EGC), and advanced gastric cancer (AGC), were higher than those in non-tumor tissues (p=0.003). In addition, the higher expression for CD44v9 was observed as the tissue becomes malignant. In the analysis of 333 gastric cancer tissues, we found that positive expression rates for CD44v9 were higher in the intestinal type or well differentiated gastric cancer than in the diffuse type or poorly differentiated gastric cancer. Interestingly, the positive expression indicated poor prognosis in EGC (5-year survival rate [5-YSR] in stage I, 81.7% vs. 95.2%; p=0.013), but not in AGC (5-YSR in stage II, 66.9% vs. 62.2%; p=0.821; 5-YSR in stage III, 34.5% vs. 32.0%; p=0.929). Moreover, strong positive expression (3+) showed a trend suggesting worse prognosis only in EGC, and it appeared to be associated with lymph node metastasis. Conclusion This study suggests that CD44v9 may be a good biomarker for prognosis prediction and for chemoprevention or biomarker-driven therapies only for EGC.