징벌적 손해배상과 법정손해배상 : 우리나라 민법과 양립가능성

Currently emerging issues regarding introduction of punitive damages is that fair reparations is not existed in reality world in Korea in light of victims’rights. However, introduction of punitive damages in the United States to Korea Civil Law has became the target of fierce polemics by traditional civil law scholars in Korea. As a matter of fact, drawbacks of punitive damages already spread out in the United States, with intense criticism. Particularly roles of punitive damages in the quest to punitive and deter, and elements for establishing punitive damages etc. There are no constant elements that can be drawn from cases or rules in various states in the United States. Furthermore, the original jurisdictions of punitive damages, such as United States or England, have tried to reform the punitive damages in consideration of aspects of fairness, efficiency or control for a better enforcement. Distinguishing factors between punitive damages and statutory damages are those: the purpose of differences, caps of amount of damages by specified by law, elements for establishment, application for contract violations. Those differences show that implementing statutory damages could be a detour way without conflict of jurisdictions rather than enforcing punitive damages. If a plaintiff is qualify and he or she proves any compensatory damages, then statutory damages can be authorized by law and the plaintiff can obtain damages over compensatory damages calculated. I admit remedies for a certain tort claim, merely compensatory damages and pain and suffering in current Korea law is not enough for full satisfaction. Imposing on statutory damages could be one of full compensation for victims damaged by unexpected illegal activities by wrongdoers.