本文選題：損益相抵 + 完全賠償��； 參考：《齊魯學刊》2017年03期

【摘要】：司法實踐中,對于損益相抵規(guī)則的理解不同,出發(fā)點不一,在法律適用上呈現(xiàn)散亂甚至沖突狀態(tài)。其原因在于有的是根據(jù)完全賠償理論,有的是根據(jù)懲罰預防說作為損益相抵規(guī)則的依據(jù),其雖然得到一定程度的承認,但都缺乏完整統(tǒng)一性,不能體現(xiàn)私法關(guān)系當事人之間聯(lián)系的直接性。損益相抵不在于是否足額賠償或懲罰賠償,核心在于是否符合矯正正義下的損害賠償基本原理以及受害人收到的利益是否是侵權(quán)人矯正自己不公行為。
[Abstract]:In judicial practice, for different rule understanding, the starting point is not a present, scattered and even conflict state in the application of the law. The reason is that some are based on full compensation theory, some punishment according to the rule of prevention as the basis, although it is recognized to a certain extent, but the lack of integrity that does not reflect the direct link between private parties. The profit and loss balance is not in full compensation or punitive damages, the core is whether it is in accordance with the corrective justice damages under the basic principle and the interests of the victims received is the infringer to correct his injustice.

【作者單位】： 南京大學法學院;
【分類號】：D923.6

【相似文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條

1 徐銀波;;論侵權(quán)損害完全賠償原則之緩和[J];法商研究;2013年03期

相關(guān)碩士學位論文 前2條

1 盛洋;侵權(quán)損害完全賠償原則適用限制研究[D];華中師范大學;2015年

2 朱桂龍;我國《合同法》第113條適用研究[D];蘭州大學;2007年

，

本文編號：1737275