本文選題：侵權(quán) + 人格權(quán)�。� 參考：《天津商業(yè)大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：人格權(quán)是民事主體享有的最基本的民事權(quán)利,但由于人格權(quán)開放性特點(diǎn),以及互聯(lián)網(wǎng)的介入,不斷衍生出來的新型人格權(quán)多樣化、復(fù)雜化,使得制度保護(hù)缺口極大,侵害頻發(fā),嚴(yán)重危害社會。傳統(tǒng)的人格權(quán)保護(hù)方式已經(jīng)難以高效抑制類似行為的發(fā)生,全面探究人格權(quán)深化保護(hù)勢在必行。懲罰性賠償作為私法公法化的產(chǎn)物,一度因其公私法性質(zhì)不明,在適用中產(chǎn)生極大爭議。但此種制度在英美法系國家早已盛行,其在私法領(lǐng)域極強(qiáng)的功能作用在美國立法中表現(xiàn)最盛,從人格權(quán)領(lǐng)域適用其開始,逐漸擴(kuò)展至其他領(lǐng)域。近幾個世紀(jì),大陸法系國家紛紛吸收借鑒英美法系國家中的懲罰性賠償制度,并結(jié)合本土法治探索其適用性,取得良好成效。我國在人格權(quán)研究方面也不例外,研究涉及環(huán)境保護(hù)、知識產(chǎn)權(quán)、著作權(quán)、網(wǎng)絡(luò)人格權(quán)、保險法、合同法、藥品安全等多領(lǐng)域。2015年版《中華人民共和國民法典·人格權(quán)法編專家建議稿(征求意見稿)》第一百零四條明確指出侵害他人人格權(quán)益,造成嚴(yán)重后果的,被侵權(quán)人有權(quán)請求相應(yīng)的懲罰性賠償。近期通過的《中華人民共和國民法總則》第一百七十九條承擔(dān)民事責(zé)任的方式中首次明確了懲罰性賠償在民法中的適用地位。這兩處表述對懲罰性賠償納入我國人格權(quán)侵權(quán)保護(hù)具有劃時代的意義,本文人格權(quán)侵權(quán)中懲罰性賠償?shù)难芯恳哺雍侠�、科學(xué)。但懲罰性賠償如何適用到人格權(quán)中,本文從以下幾方面展開論述:第一部分:前言。簡述研究背景、研究意義。第二部分:人格權(quán)和懲罰性賠償?shù)闹贫群喗�。研究懲罰性賠償?shù)亩ㄐ?解決公或私、民或刑領(lǐng)域存在的爭議,為懲罰性賠償納入人格權(quán)做準(zhǔn)備:兩制度的銜接,即:簡述本文主題的書寫理由。第三部分:必要性分析。包括第三章和第四章,分別從理論需求和現(xiàn)實(shí)需求兩方面入手。先分析風(fēng)險社會下侵權(quán)頻發(fā)的現(xiàn)實(shí)急迫性,民法社會化理念對制度構(gòu)建的驅(qū)動力,以及懲罰性賠償?shù)膬?yōu)勢,再從人格權(quán)傳統(tǒng)制度保護(hù)的漏洞研究入手分析,指出現(xiàn)行侵權(quán)法對人格權(quán)的不重視,傳統(tǒng)人格權(quán)救濟(jì)兩大方式:補(bǔ)償性賠償、精神損害賠償?shù)牟蛔阒�。第四部�?制度基礎(chǔ)。搜集整理我國現(xiàn)存的有關(guān)立法、草案和建議稿,為本文的主題書寫提供制度依據(jù)。第五部分:借鑒國外相對成熟的制度經(jīng)驗(yàn),從制度定位、構(gòu)成要素、賠償標(biāo)準(zhǔn)、賠償金分配以及與刑事懲罰的沖突五方面入手,預(yù)設(shè)我國人格權(quán)適用懲罰性賠償?shù)囊?guī)則。目前,國內(nèi)學(xué)者對于本文的論題少有研究,大多是對兩種制度的分別研究和完善,而美國有相應(yīng)的制度對接可供借鑒,因此本文少量采取比較法路徑研究。以懲罰性賠償發(fā)展相對成熟的美國為借鑒,結(jié)合我國立法司法現(xiàn)狀,以及其學(xué)理依據(jù),為我國人格權(quán)懲罰性賠償制度的構(gòu)建提出建議。同時,采用文獻(xiàn)分析法搜集和分析大量法條和相關(guān)文獻(xiàn),旨在厘清懲罰性賠償制度、人格權(quán)保護(hù)相關(guān)制度及其他理論的內(nèi)涵和關(guān)系,為更好地研究懲罰性賠償在人格權(quán)中的適用做準(zhǔn)備。本文的創(chuàng)新之處在于,將分別研究較為成熟的懲罰性賠償制度和人格權(quán)制度予以結(jié)合,通過對國內(nèi)外學(xué)者在相關(guān)制度、理論和實(shí)踐方面的論考察、分析,對懲罰性賠償制度強(qiáng)大的功能的認(rèn)識,挖掘懲罰性賠償制度社會功能,賦予其社會意義,探究懲罰性賠償制度在人格權(quán)中的定位、定性,從而預(yù)設(shè)出一套較合理的制度規(guī)范。懲罰性賠償制度目前屬于民刑法交叉學(xué)科點(diǎn),對該制度的研究,有助于民刑研究的進(jìn)一步充實(shí)。
[Abstract]:The right of personality is the most basic civil right that the civil subject enjoys. However, due to the open character of personality right and the involvement of the Internet, the diversification and complexity of the new personality right derived from the Internet has made the protection gap of the system great, the frequent infringement and the serious harm to the society. The way of protecting the personality right has been difficult to effectively restrain the similar lines. It is imperative to fully explore the protection of personality right in an all-round way. As a product of the public law of private law, punitive damages, which has been widely disputed in the application of the public and private law, has been prevalent in the common law countries, and its strong functional function in the field of private law is the most prosperous in American legislation. In recent centuries, civil law countries have absorbed the system of punitive damages in common law countries and explored its applicability in combination with the local rule of law, and achieved good results in recent centuries. In our country, the study of personality rights is no exception, and the research involves environmental protection, intellectual property rights, and works. Right, network personality rights, insurance law, contract law, drug safety and other fields of.2015 edition of the national code of the people's Republic of China (Soliciting Comments) of the civil code of the people's Republic of China (solicit draft) clearly pointed out that the infringement of other people's personality rights and interests, causing serious consequences, the empowered person has the right to request the corresponding punitive damages. < The general provisions of the civil law of People's Republic of China > the 179th articles of civil liability for the first time clearly define the applicable position of punitive damages in civil law. These two expressions have epoch-making significance to the protection of punitive damages into the protection of the right of personality in our country, and the study of punitive damages in the right of personality right invade is also more reasonable. Science. However, how to apply punitive damages to personality rights, this article is discussed in the following aspects: the first part: preface. Brief introduction of research background and research significance. The second part: a brief introduction to the system of personality rights and punitive damages. The study of the qualitative of punitive damages, the settlement of disputes in the field of public or private, civil or criminal areas, and punitive damages To prepare for the right to personality: the connection of the two system, that is, a brief description of the writing reasons for the theme of this article. The third part: the analysis of the necessity, including the third and the fourth chapters, respectively from the theoretical and practical needs of two aspects, respectively, to analyze the realistic urgency of the frequent torts in the risk society, the driving force of the concept of civil law socialization to the construction of the system, as well as the driving force of the system construction in civil law, and The advantages of punitive damages, and then from the study of the loopholes in the protection of the traditional personality system, point out that the tort law does not attach importance to the right of personality, and the two ways of traditional personal right relief: compensatory compensation, and the deficiency of spiritual damage compensation. The fourth part: system foundation. Collect and collate the relevant legislation, draft and suggestion in our country. The fifth part: drawing on the relative mature institutional experience of foreign countries, starting with the five aspects of the system orientation, the constituent elements, the compensation standard, the distribution of compensation and the conflict with the criminal punishment, it presupposes the rules for the application of punitive damages in our country's personality rights. At present, the domestic scholars have few questions about this article. Most of the research is to study and improve the two systems separately, and the United States has the corresponding system for reference. Therefore, this paper takes a few comparative method research. It takes the US as a reference for punitive compensation to develop relatively mature America, and combines the status of our legislative judicature, as well as its academic basis, for the system of punitive damages for our country's personality rights. At the same time, it adopts the method of literature analysis to collect and analyze a large number of laws and related documents, aiming at clarifying the connotations and relations of the system of punitive damages, the system of the protection of personality rights and other theories, and preparing for the better study of the application of punitive damages in the right of personality. The more mature punitive damages system and the personality right system are combined, through the study of the scholars at home and abroad in the relevant system, theory and practice, the understanding of the powerful function of the punitive damages system, the social function of punitive damages system, the social significance, and the inquisition of the punitive damages system in the personality right. A set of more reasonable institutional norms is presupposed in the position and nature of the system. The punitive damages system belongs to the interdisciplinary point of the civil criminal law. The study of the system will help to further enrich the research of the civil punishment.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：天津商業(yè)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D923

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 朱戰(zhàn)威;;懲罰性賠償制度的理論困境及其出路[J];西部法學(xué)評論;2016年03期

2 陸青;;論中國民法中的“解法典化”現(xiàn)象[J];中外法學(xué);2014年06期

3 朱廣新;;懲罰性賠償制度的演進(jìn)與適用[J];中國社會科學(xué);2014年03期

4 劉永存;;民法典對民法文化發(fā)展的消極影響及其克服[J];安慶師范學(xué)院學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);2011年01期

5 林志紅;;懲罰性賠償?shù)倪m用問題探討[J];湖北第二師范學(xué)院學(xué)報;2010年10期

6 張新寶;;侵權(quán)責(zé)任法立法的利益衡量[J];中國法學(xué);2009年04期

7 李彥芳;;懲罰性賠償與中國的侵權(quán)立法——兼談現(xiàn)代侵權(quán)法的功能定位[J];社會科學(xué)家;2009年01期

8 董春華;;各國有關(guān)懲罰性賠償制度的比較研究[J];東方論壇;2008年01期

9 劉東亮;;懲罰性賠償制度的價值及其在我國的完善[J];前沿;2007年07期

10 李平;;懲罰性賠償在我國侵權(quán)法領(lǐng)域的適用[J];江淮論壇;2006年05期

相關(guān)會議論文 前1條

1 羅冠杰;;論懲罰性賠償制度在我國藥品安全責(zé)任領(lǐng)域的建立[A];2009年中國藥學(xué)會藥事管理專業(yè)委員會年會暨“國家藥物政策與《藥品管理法》修訂研究”論壇論文文集[C];2009年

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 于冠魁;經(jīng)濟(jì)法學(xué)視野下懲罰性賠償適用問題研究[D];西南政法大學(xué);2014年

2 張諾諾;懲罰性賠償制度研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2010年

，

本文編號：2114925