本文選題：經(jīng)營(yíng)者 + 場(chǎng)所��； 參考：《中國(guó)海洋大學(xué)》2015年碩士論文

【摘要】：近年來(lái)各種休閑娛樂(lè)場(chǎng)所的出現(xiàn),在滿足群眾物質(zhì)文化需求、增添生活樂(lè)趣的同時(shí),其中的安全隱患也給公眾的人身、財(cái)產(chǎn)安全造成了威脅,經(jīng)營(yíng)者違反場(chǎng)所安全保障義務(wù)而引發(fā)的損害賠償糾紛常常見(jiàn)諸報(bào)端。隨著公眾法律意識(shí)的不斷增強(qiáng)和我國(guó)有關(guān)立法的相繼出臺(tái),經(jīng)營(yíng)者場(chǎng)所安全保障義務(wù)的責(zé)任認(rèn)定問(wèn)題逐漸受到社會(huì)各界的廣泛關(guān)注和重視。但是,由于我國(guó)對(duì)經(jīng)營(yíng)者場(chǎng)所安全保障義務(wù)的法律規(guī)范及相關(guān)制度不夠健全,導(dǎo)致在司法實(shí)踐中經(jīng)營(yíng)者違反義務(wù)所應(yīng)承擔(dān)的責(zé)任往往難以明確界定。因此,有必要從經(jīng)營(yíng)者場(chǎng)所安全保障義務(wù)的理論問(wèn)題入手,進(jìn)而明確經(jīng)營(yíng)者場(chǎng)所安全保障義務(wù)的責(zé)任如何認(rèn)定、怎樣承擔(dān)等問(wèn)題,為進(jìn)一步完善我國(guó)相關(guān)立法提供參考,為有效解決司法實(shí)踐中的責(zé)任認(rèn)定問(wèn)題打下基礎(chǔ)。本文除引言和結(jié)語(yǔ)以外,包括以下四個(gè)部分：第一部分,經(jīng)營(yíng)者場(chǎng)所安全保障義務(wù)的基本理論。該部分主要梳理了經(jīng)營(yíng)者場(chǎng)所安全保障義務(wù)的概念、內(nèi)容、理論依據(jù)以及法理依據(jù)等問(wèn)題。首先,經(jīng)營(yíng)者場(chǎng)所安全保障義務(wù)是指經(jīng)營(yíng)者對(duì)消費(fèi)者、潛在消費(fèi)者等進(jìn)入其經(jīng)營(yíng)場(chǎng)所的人所承擔(dān)的保障其人身、財(cái)產(chǎn)安全的義務(wù)；其次,經(jīng)營(yíng)者場(chǎng)所安全保障義務(wù)的內(nèi)容既包括硬件方面,也包括軟件方面；再次,經(jīng)營(yíng)者場(chǎng)所安全保障義務(wù)理論上的依據(jù)可以概括為危險(xiǎn)控制理論、收益與風(fēng)險(xiǎn)相一致理論和成本最優(yōu)理論,法理上的依據(jù)主要是誠(chéng)實(shí)信用原則、平等原則等民法基本原則。第二部分,違反安全保障義務(wù)的歸責(zé)原則。該部分詳細(xì)闡述了關(guān)于經(jīng)營(yíng)者場(chǎng)所安全保障義務(wù)歸責(zé)原則的學(xué)術(shù)觀點(diǎn)及實(shí)踐做法,并提出應(yīng)適用過(guò)錯(cuò)推定責(zé)任原則的觀點(diǎn)。第三部分,經(jīng)營(yíng)者違反場(chǎng)所安全保障義務(wù)的認(rèn)定。具體包括行為人存在過(guò)錯(cuò)的認(rèn)定、行為人存在違反場(chǎng)所安全保障義務(wù)的行為如何判斷、損害事實(shí)的發(fā)生以及行為與損害之間的因果關(guān)系的認(rèn)定,其中重點(diǎn)分析了認(rèn)定經(jīng)營(yíng)者過(guò)錯(cuò)的標(biāo)準(zhǔn),筆者認(rèn)為一般認(rèn)定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)可以借鑒善良管理人標(biāo)準(zhǔn)確定,同時(shí)針對(duì)特殊情況適用更為嚴(yán)格的特殊標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。第四部分,探討違反安全保障義務(wù)侵權(quán)責(zé)任認(rèn)定中的問(wèn)題及完善,建議在立法中增加經(jīng)營(yíng)者存在過(guò)錯(cuò)的判定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)、適用的歸責(zé)原則及舉證責(zé)任分配等法律規(guī)范,同時(shí)構(gòu)建認(rèn)定責(zé)任分擔(dān)的具體方法,為我國(guó)經(jīng)營(yíng)者場(chǎng)所安全保障義務(wù)制度的完善提供借鑒。
[Abstract]:In recent years, the emergence of various leisure and entertainment places has not only satisfied the material and cultural needs of the masses and increased the fun of life, but also posed a threat to the personal and property safety of the public at the same time. The dispute of damages caused by the operator's breach of the duty of safety and security of the place is often reported in the newspaper. With the increasing of the public's legal consciousness and the introduction of the relevant legislation in our country, the responsibility of the operator's duty to ensure the safety of the place has been paid more and more attention to by all walks of life. However, due to the lack of perfect legal norms and related systems for the duty of safety and security of operators in our country, it is often difficult to define clearly the responsibility of operators for breach of their obligations in judicial practice. Therefore, it is necessary to start with the theoretical problems of the duty of safety and security of the operator's place, and then clarify the responsibility of the duty of safety and security of the operator's place, how to assume and so on, so as to provide a reference for the further improvement of the relevant legislation of our country. It lays a foundation for solving the problem of responsibility recognition in judicial practice. In addition to the introduction and conclusion, this paper includes the following four parts: the first part, the basic theory of the operator's duty of safety and security. This part mainly combs the concept, the content, the theory basis and the legal principle basis of the operator's place safety guarantee duty. First, the duty of the operator to ensure the safety of the place is the obligation of the operator to protect his personal and property safety to the consumer, the potential consumer, etc., The content of the duty of safety and security of operator's place includes both hardware and software. Thirdly, the theoretical basis of the duty of safety and security of operator's place can be summarized as the theory of risk control. The basic principles of civil law, such as the principle of good faith and the principle of equality, are the basis of the theory of consistent income and risk and the optimal theory of cost. The second part, the principle of imputation of violating the duty of safety and security. In this part, the author expatiates on the academic viewpoint and practice of liability imputation principle of operator's place safety and security, and puts forward the point of view that the principle of presumption of fault liability should be applied. The third part, the operator violates the place safety guarantee duty confirmation. It includes the cognizance of the perpetrator's fault, how to judge the behavior of violating the duty of safety and security of the place, the occurrence of the damage fact and the determination of the causality between the act and the damage. The author thinks that the general standard can be determined by the standard of kind-hearted manager, and at the same time, the more strict standard can be applied to the special circumstances. In the fourth part, the author discusses the problems and perfection of tort liability in violation of safety and security obligations, and proposes to increase the legal norms such as the judgment standard of operator's fault in legislation, the applicable principle of liability imputation and the distribution of burden of proof, etc. At the same time, the concrete method of responsibility sharing is constructed to provide reference for the perfection of the duty system of safety and security of the operators in our country.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：中國(guó)海洋大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號(hào)】：D923

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 羅時(shí)貴;繆寧;;試析經(jīng)營(yíng)者的安全保障義務(wù)[J];南昌高專學(xué)報(bào);2006年04期

2 羅漸;茅曉暉;;經(jīng)營(yíng)者違反安全保障義務(wù)的歸責(zé)問(wèn)題[J];江蘇警官學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2006年05期

3 洪偉;余甬帆;;試論銀行對(duì)客戶的安全保障義務(wù)[J];社會(huì)科學(xué)家;2006年06期

4 安寧;萬(wàn)國(guó)芬;;完善我國(guó)安全保障義務(wù)立法的意義和建議[J];商場(chǎng)現(xiàn)代化;2007年09期

5 龍翼飛;魏振瀛;梁書文;江偉;孫曉莉;;從一起案例看公園的安全保障義務(wù)[J];商品與質(zhì)量;2007年06期

6 苗延波;;經(jīng)營(yíng)者對(duì)服務(wù)場(chǎng)所承擔(dān)安全保障義務(wù)的類型及其內(nèi)容研究[J];河南省政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2007年02期

7 成明珠;邱雪梅;;論民法中的安全保障義務(wù)[J];求索;2007年04期

8 梁成國(guó);;論經(jīng)營(yíng)者的安全保障義務(wù)[J];企業(yè)家天地;2007年06期

9 岳衛(wèi)峰;;論經(jīng)營(yíng)者的安全保障義務(wù)[J];中國(guó)環(huán)境管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2007年02期

10 崔艷;;經(jīng)營(yíng)者安全保障義務(wù)的合理范圍[J];河南公安高等專科學(xué)校學(xué)報(bào);2007年04期

相關(guān)會(huì)議論文 前10條

1 焦曉菲;;論經(jīng)營(yíng)服務(wù)者的安全保障義務(wù)[A];第一屆全國(guó)安全科學(xué)理論研討會(huì)論文集[C];2007年

2 梁明祥;盧安龍;;淺析物業(yè)服務(wù)企業(yè)的安全保障義務(wù)[A];當(dāng)代法學(xué)論壇（二○一○年第2輯）[C];2010年

3 楊垠紅;;安全保障義務(wù)的羅馬法溯源[A];全國(guó)外國(guó)法制史研究會(huì)學(xué)術(shù)叢書——混合的法律文化[C];2007年

4 石紀(jì)虎;朱識(shí)義;;論商業(yè)銀行對(duì)客戶的安全保障義務(wù)——以第三人非法侵害客戶財(cái)產(chǎn)為視角[A];中國(guó)商法年刊（2008）：金融法制的現(xiàn)代化[C];2008年

5 何穎;;論銀行的安全保障義務(wù)及責(zé)任認(rèn)定——從偽卡盜刷案件切入[A];金融法學(xué)家（第五輯）[C];2013年

6 楊垠紅;;論安全保障義務(wù)的學(xué)理基礎(chǔ)[A];全國(guó)外國(guó)法制史研究會(huì)學(xué)術(shù)叢書——多元的法律文化[C];2006年

7 張偉民;趙俊;;論侵權(quán)責(zé)任法上的安全保障義務(wù)[A];第三屆西部律師發(fā)展論壇論文集[C];2010年

8 胡勇軍;;論經(jīng)營(yíng)者的安全保障義務(wù)[A];中國(guó)民商法實(shí)務(wù)論壇論文集[C];2005年

9 楊垠紅;;我國(guó)侵權(quán)立法確立不作為侵權(quán)責(zé)任之探討——德國(guó)一般安全注意義務(wù)對(duì)我國(guó)的借鑒[A];全國(guó)外國(guó)法制史研究會(huì)學(xué)術(shù)叢書——大陸法系及其對(duì)中國(guó)的影響[C];2009年

10 楊垠紅;;英美法的作為義務(wù)及其對(duì)我國(guó)相關(guān)制度的影響與借鑒[A];全國(guó)外國(guó)法制史研究會(huì)學(xué)術(shù)叢書——英美法系及其對(duì)中國(guó)的影響[C];2008年

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前10條

1 朱巍 朱姝;芻議違反安全保障義務(wù)的侵權(quán)責(zé)任[N];江蘇法制報(bào);2006年

2 徐錚　作者單位：南京大學(xué)法學(xué)院;經(jīng)營(yíng)者對(duì)消費(fèi)者安全保障義務(wù)的評(píng)判標(biāo)準(zhǔn)[N];江蘇法制報(bào);2007年

3 鄭冰;經(jīng)營(yíng)者安全保障義務(wù)的保護(hù)對(duì)象認(rèn)定[N];人民法院報(bào);2007年

4 宋凱;醫(yī)院違反安全保障義務(wù)應(yīng)擔(dān)責(zé)[N];健康報(bào);2008年

5 周玉文;醫(yī)院不能忽視履行安全保障義務(wù)[N];健康報(bào);2008年

6 韓國(guó)華;淺談場(chǎng)合管理者的安全保障義務(wù)[N];江蘇經(jīng)濟(jì)報(bào);2009年

7 石磊;醫(yī)院安全保障義務(wù)的合理限度范圍[N];人民法院報(bào);2010年

8 楊愛(ài)成;安全保障義務(wù)之合理限度判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)[N];江蘇經(jīng)濟(jì)報(bào);2010年

9 汪洋;學(xué)校體育場(chǎng)館開(kāi)放后的安全保障義務(wù)[N];江蘇經(jīng)濟(jì)報(bào);2011年

10 端學(xué)鋒;經(jīng)營(yíng)場(chǎng)所應(yīng)承擔(dān)安全保障義務(wù)[N];江蘇法制報(bào);2013年

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 楊垠紅;侵權(quán)法上安全保障義務(wù)之研究[D];廈門大學(xué);2006年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前10條

1 夏珍;安全保障義務(wù)研究[D];山東大學(xué);2008年

2 劉鵬;論經(jīng)營(yíng)者的安全保障義務(wù)及責(zé)任承擔(dān)[D];中國(guó)海洋大學(xué);2008年

3 陳麗;論公共場(chǎng)所的安全保障義務(wù)[D];華東政法大學(xué);2008年

4 許麗陽(yáng);論經(jīng)營(yíng)者的安全保障義務(wù)[D];華東政法大學(xué);2008年

5 劉娟;經(jīng)營(yíng)者違反安全保障義務(wù)的侵權(quán)責(zé)任研究[D];西南政法大學(xué);2008年

6 鄒娜;論提供服務(wù)者的安全保障義務(wù)[D];西南政法大學(xué);2008年

7 宋虎;論經(jīng)營(yíng)者的安全保障義務(wù)[D];蘇州大學(xué);2008年

8 吳f3炯;論侵權(quán)法上的安全保障義務(wù)[D];山東大學(xué);2008年

9 冉睿;經(jīng)營(yíng)者違反安全保障義務(wù)的民事責(zé)任[D];重慶大學(xué);2008年

10 顧洋;安全保障義務(wù)研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2008年

，

本文編號(hào)：1908610