英國法上 精神的 傷害의 賠償에 대한 硏究

This article aims to introduce the english law on recovery for psychiatric injury and make some interpretations on korean civil law. After thorough review of the english law on recovery for psychiatric injury, the author has drawn the following conclusions. First, serious disruption to peace of mind is no less worthy of social and legal support than physical injury to the body. because the after-effects of trauma may never fully dissipate, remain to haunt a person and erode mental stability. Secondly, suspicions of malingering and floodgates' fears are an extremely poor reason for denying a remedy, if the cause is just one. so The unreasonable limitations should not be imposed on recovery for psychiatric injury. Thirdly, the plaintiff should be required to prove ① psychiatric injury, ②reasonable foreseeability, ③ causative link between the tortfeasor's conduct and the plaintiff's mental condition. Finally, the nature of the accident, the position of the person who receives the shock and the person who has been injured, means of perception of the accident are all facts which are relevant in determining liability, but no one of them can be regarded as conclusive.