프로야구경기 중 관중의 부상으로 인한 법률관계

Safety screening can’t protect spectator from foul ball perfectly. It is unsound to shift the risk of injury on spectator because of unpredictability of foul ball, time-consuming baseball game and considerable distractions. It is positively necessary to impose high degree of duty of care on baseball operators who gain a good income from baseball industry and to limit the application of doctrine of assumption of risk. Spectator gets insurance money from sports liability insurance and baseball operators can spread insurance premium among spectators without drastically increasing ticket prices. It is sound to pave the way of the liability for spectator at risk of injury in that considerable distractions actually divert a spectator’s attention from the field of play, thus preventing him from focusing on the danger from foul ball and some foul balls are unavoidable for spectator. The comparative negligence analysis stimulate spectator’s attention and protect the interests of baseball operators and insurer by taking into account the degree of reasonableness shown by the injured spectator’s behavior and limiting liability to spectator. Exemption clause in ticket back side holds good not to tort claim but to contract claim. Exemption clause in contract claim can be void according to Regulation of Standardized Contracts Act Artt. 6, 7. In tort claim spectator’s damages can be reduced according to comparative negligence analysis without application of exemption clause.