프랑스법상 산업재해에 대한 손해배상

Towards the end of the nineteenth century some French lawyers became sympathetic to the difficulty which workers injured at work encountered in establishing the fault of their employers. Various suggestions were put forward, including treating the employer’s liability as based on a contractual obligation as to their employee’s safety and holding the employer as ‘keeper’ of the thing which caused the employee’s injury. In 1898 the legislature intervened and imposed liability on employers to provide fixed rates or tariffs of compensation to their workers for death or personal injuries without proof of fault. The compensation scheme has a limitation in that it is an arbitrary share of damages rather than complete compensation for damages. However, if the employer has intentional or unforgivable fault, the victim can receive full compensation. If an accident at work is a crime of the employer, the victim can claim damages in the form of civil action in the criminal preceeding. In Korea, workers who have suffered an accident at work can also get profit from the regime of Industrial Injury Compensation. If the amount of compensation is less than that of civil liability, the difference may be compensated through a civil lawsuit. However, in cases where a victim loses his or her ability to work and receives lump sum compensation for future damage, our case law deducts intermediate interest. The discount rate applied in this case is the civil legal interest rate of 5% per annum, which is significantly different from the market interest rate. In other words, the median interest is being deducted too much. Also, from a procedural point of view, in Korea, victims of serious accidents do not have the same procedural rights as in France. Korea's compensation order system, which is mentioned as a procedure for redressing crime victims, is a system that falls short of the French civil action in the criminal proceeding.