共同饮酒人安全保障义务研究

发布时间：2018-04-12 07:15

本文选题：共同饮酒人 + 损害赔偿　；参考：《华东政法大学》2015年硕士论文

【摘要】：饮酒是社会生活中一种常见的联络感情,表情达意的行为,但因此而引发的纠纷却不断增加。共同饮酒人之间是否存在安全保障义务成为此类案件的争议焦点,但因各方看法不一,各地法院针对此类案件作出的判决也大相径庭,出现了同案不同判的现象,不仅引起了群众的困惑而且使法律的权威性受到质疑。本文将以广西和河南的两个真实案例入手,对两案的基本案情进行全面分析,找出两案同案不同判的原因,继而引出对共同饮酒人之间安全保障义务的讨论。笔者通过搜集大量司法实践中出现的共同饮酒引发的损害赔偿案,并对该类型案件进行分析,并根据案情特点进行分类。同时,根据不同的判决结果,分析司法实践中法院做出此种判决时所依据的法律理论以及该种判决可能出现的问题,并提出自己的观点。本文主要将分为以下四个部分对共同饮酒人之间的安全保障义务进行分析:第一部分:通过广西和河南的两个同案不同判的案例进行对比分析引出两案争议的焦点即共同饮酒人之间是否存在安全保障义务。将案件按照处理结果进行分类并分析每一类判决所依据的法律理论。第二部分:探求共同饮酒人之间安全保障义务的正当性基础,主要从法律依据和法理依据两个方面进行分析,为共同饮酒人之间存在安全保障义务这一观点提供法律和法理两方面的支撑。第三部分:分析共同饮酒人之间安全保障义务的种类和限度。对现实生活中共同饮酒人之间产生的安全保障义务进行分类,并结合具体案例,分析不同种类的安全保障义务在司法实践中的处理方式与结果。同时,权利和义务又是相对的,在保护权利人的同时也不应该过分加重义务人的责任,共同饮酒人之间的安全保障义务亦然,因此,分析此类安全保障义务的限度,对于维护司法实践中的公平正义具有重要作用。第四部分:结合我国的实际情况以及前文的分析总结,对我国共同饮酒案件中在构成要件、免责事由、以及该类案件在我国司法实践中责任分配中存在的问题进行分析,并提出自己的建议。
[Abstract]:Drinking is a common social life, emotional, expressive behavior, but the resulting disputes are increasing.Whether there is a duty of safety and security among the co-drinkers has become the focus of controversy in such cases, but because of the different views of the parties, the judgments made by local courts on such cases are also quite different, resulting in the phenomenon of different judgments in the same cases.It not only caused confusion among the masses but also called into question the authority of the law.This article will start with two real cases in Guangxi and Henan, analyze the basic facts of the two cases, find out the reasons for the different judgments of the two cases, and then lead to the discussion of the duty of safety and security between the co-drinkers.By collecting a large number of cases of damages caused by joint drinking in judicial practice, the author analyzes this type of cases and classifies them according to the characteristics of the case.At the same time, according to the different judgment results, this paper analyzes the legal theory on which the court makes such a judgment in judicial practice and the problems that may appear in the judgment, and puts forward its own viewpoint.This article will be divided into the following four parts of the common drinkers between the safety and security obligations analysis: the first part: through the Guangxi and Henan cases of two different cases of comparative analysis leading to the two cases of controversy JiaoPoint that is whether there is a joint drinking between the duty of security.Classify the cases according to the results and analyze the legal theories on which each type of judgment is based.The second part: to explore the legitimate basis of the duty of safety and security between drinkers, mainly from the legal basis and the legal basis of two aspects of analysis,It provides legal and legal support for the view that there is a duty of safety between drinkers.The third part analyzes the types and limits of the duty of safety and security among the drinkers.This paper classifies the safety and security obligations among the common drinkers in real life, and analyzes the handling methods and results of different kinds of safety and security obligations in judicial practice.At the same time, the rights and obligations are relative, while protecting the obligee should not increase the duty of obligor too much, so should the duty of safety and security among the joint drinkers. Therefore, this paper analyzes the limits of such safety and security obligations.It plays an important role in maintaining fairness and justice in judicial practice.The fourth part: combined with the actual situation of our country and the previous analysis and summary, this paper analyzes the constitutive elements, the reasons of exemption, and the problems existing in the distribution of responsibility in the judicial practice of this kind of cases in our country.And put forward their own suggestions.
【学位授予单位】：华东政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：D923

【相似文献】