북한 손해보상법과 북한 민법상 불법침해행위와의 관계

The relationship between the North Korea’s “Civil Act” and the “Damage Compensation Act” can be seen as a relationship between a law for determining damages and a law for implementation of compensation for a damage. In addition, the characteristics of the Civil Act and the Damage Compensation Act can be seen as a relationship for legal application according to its causality. In other words, in terms of the natural process in damage occurrence, all causal relationships can be explained as a general causal relationship, but the first step is to reveal among them the cause of civil liability. This establishes torts. It has the following logical structure and legal system. That is, damages which were established by meeting the requirements for establishment can be compensated by the Damage Compensation Act. This presupposes that causality is diverse. The causality for the establishment of tort is a matter of factual causal relationship. As a result, torts in which liability of damage is recognized are stipulated in the Civil Act. The causality in the Damage Compensation Act is a matter of procedures such as the confirmation of scope of damage and litigant. There are various theories about causality in tort law of South Korea, namely the main theory of “proximate causal relation” and the minor theory arguing that ‘the causality as a requirement for the establishment of tort and the causality that sets the scope of compensation for damages should be distinguished.’ The reason for this debate is that there is no provision on compensation for damages by tort. Therefore, North Korea's Damage Compensation Act seems to aim at excluding abstraction and stipulating liability for damages.