오늘날 자동차는 인간생활에서 없어서는 안 되는 생활필수품이고 그 수도 날이 갈수록 증가되고 있다. 자동차의 이용이 증가할수록 필연적으로 사고를 동반하게 되는데, 그 사고에 대하여 피해자가 가해자의 과실을 입증해야 하는 전통적인 손해배상책임법의 이론은 피해자의 보호를 어렵게 한다. 그래서 각국에서는 자동차특별책임법이 일찍부터 제정되었다. 우리나라도 이와 같은 각국의 입법추세에 따라 자동차손해배상보장법이 제정시행되고 있다.자배법 제3조는 “자기를 위하여 자동차를 운행하는 자는 그 운행으로 인하여 다른 사람을 사망하게 하거나 부상하게 한 때에는 그 손해를 배상할 책임을 진다”고 규정하고 있다. 이 조문에서 말하는 ‘타인’이란 손해배상청구를 받는 자 이외의 자를 가리킨다고 이해할 수 있는데, 이 타인의 범주에는 운행자도 포함된다. 그러나 운행자이기 때문에 타인성이 부정되는 경우가 있을 수 있다.본고에서는 자동차운행자의 타인성 인정 여부에 관한 일본 판례의 동향을 살펴보고자 한다. 일본의 자배법 제3조의 내용과 우리나라의 자배법 제3조의 내용이 거의 일치하고 있기 때문에 일본에서의 논의와 판례의 동향은 우리나라의 자동차손해배상의 법리에 많은 도움을 줄 것이다.

Trends in the Case regarding ‘the Nature of Third Party’ status in the Japanese Automobile Damage Compensation Law Cars have become such an integral and essential part of the daily lives of the modern people that they cannot seem to survive without them. As such, its numbers have been steadily increasing. Along with the increase in the usage of cars, motor accidents are inevitable. It must be pointed out here that the traditional theory of automobile damage compensation law which states that the victim must prove that a misconduct has been committed by the said culprit is not very sound especially in light of protecting the victim. Therefore, many enlightened countries have been exerting their efforts in supplementing its shortcomings and revising the principles of the liability quite early in the automobile damage compensation law. Following this legislation trend, Korea has also enacted and is executing the Automobile Damage Compensation Law (hereafter referred to as ADCL). Clause 3 of the ADCL states that “a person who drives a car for himself (hereafter referred to as 'driver') is held responsible for all incurred damages in the event of causing the death or injuring another individual when driving.” From this, we are able to understand that the 'third party' mentioned in the text includes all other individuals besides the person who receives the liability claim. The driver is also included or falls into the category of this third party. However, because he is the driver, it may be the case that this category status is denied to him. In this study, trends in the Japanese case regarding the acknowledgement of third party status of the automobile driver is looked into. As the contents in clause 3 of the Japanses ADCL and the Korean ADCL are almost identical, I believe that the trends in the case and discussions in Japan would help a great deal in solving similar problems in Korea as well.

Trends in the Case regarding ‘the Nature of Third Party’ status in the Japanese Automobile Damage Compensation Law Cars have become such an integral and essential part of the daily lives of the modern people that they cannot seem to survive without them. As such, its numbers have been steadily increasing. Along with the increase in the usage of cars, motor accidents are inevitable. It must be pointed out here that the traditional theory of automobile damage compensation law which states that the victim must prove that a misconduct has been committed by the said culprit is not very sound especially in light of protecting the victim. Therefore, many enlightened countries have been exerting their efforts in supplementing its shortcomings and revising the principles of the liability quite early in the automobile damage compensation law. Following this legislation trend, Korea has also enacted and is executing the Automobile Damage Compensation Law (hereafter referred to as ADCL). Clause 3 of the ADCL states that “a person who drives a car for himself (hereafter referred to as 'driver') is held responsible for all incurred damages in the event of causing the death or injuring another individual when driving.” From this, we are able to understand that the 'third party' mentioned in the text includes all other individuals besides the person who receives the liability claim. The driver is also included or falls into the category of this third party. However, because he is the driver, it may be the case that this category status is denied to him. In this study, trends in the Japanese case regarding the acknowledgement of third party status of the automobile driver is looked into. As the contents in clause 3 of the Japanses ADCL and the Korean ADCL are almost identical, I believe that the trends in the case and discussions in Japan would help a great deal in solving similar problems in Korea as well.

the Automobile Damage Compensation Law(ADCL). damage compensation. driver. the Nature of Third Party.