자동차사고에서의 과실비율제도와 신뢰의 원칙

This article critically analyzes the structural problems and legal confusion within the negligence ratio system for traffic accidents. The current standards for determining negligence and the operation of the Dispute Deliberation Committee are designed to be centered on insurance companies, leading to the unreasonable reality where victims often bear a portion of the tortfeasor's losses. Key issues identified are the a mixture of the concepts of “light” negligence for contributory negligence and “strict” negligence required for the establishment of a tort, and the failure to properly reflect the Principle of Trust, which has been developed through judicial precedents, in the negligence ratio calculations. Although the Principle of Trust is a crucial legal doctrine that prevents excessive liability by negating the establishment of a tort for a victim who reasonably trusted that the other party would comply with traffic regulations, it is currently applied only in a limited manner in the system. This article proposes the following improvements to overcome such legal confusion and imbalance in system operation. First, it suggests clearly separating negligence as a requirement for tort formation and negligence as contributory negligence in determining fault ratios. Second, it calls for strengthening the legal protection of victims by systematically reflecting the principle of trust in fault ratio recognition standards. Third, to secure fairness and procedural legitimacy of the dispute resolution committee, it is necessary to eliminate the bias of the insurance industry's interests and expand the participation of public representatives. Fourth, minor negligence of the victim should only be fairly considered in the stage of contributory negligence and should not be abused as a basis for tort formation. These improvements are expected to contribute to restoring public trust in the fault ratio system, genuinely protecting victims, and securing the soundness of the insurance industry.