MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126530913

權利行使期間에 관한 爭點과 民法改正 方案

2010· article· ko· W2126530913 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

Venue민사법학 · 2010
Typearticle
Languageko
FieldEngineering
TopicMarine and Coastal Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDamagesLawTortCivil codeStatute of limitationsStatutory lawPolitical scienceStatutePunitive damagesCivil law (Civil law)Civil procedurePublic lawLiability
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The discussion to amend the statutory limitation provisions in the Korean Civil Code should not be limited to a consideration of the statute of limitations per se, but it should include possible amendment of other forms of exclusionary period in the Code. Especially it is important to find a . way to amend the statutory limitation provisions in Civil Code in regard of long lurking damages and continuous frauds, duress and concealment. The disadvantages that child victims suffer in regard of limitation period should also be removed. In order to achieve this goal. we recommend an amendment of the limitation-related provisions in torts law by rationalizing the commencement of limitation period and actual calculation of the period. The trends of civil law amendments in Germany, France, and other parts of continental jurisdictions that incorporated subjectivity principle, and the examples of US, UK and Canadian legal system that widely adopted discovery rule or discoverability principle are worth considering in I the Korean civil law amendment. The provisions of exclusionary period also need similar modification. The recommendations of this article for Civil Code amendment includes: First, there should be a new section included as an exception to the objective limitation period so as to give remedies concerning the health-related damages caused by environmental pollution or the damages of occupational diseases where damages are lurking for a long time before discovered. Second, when the victim is a child in a tort case where the right of sexual self-determination is infringed. there should be a provision to protect the childs right not to be time barred until he become adult. For example, there can be a provision that postpones the limitation period until the child reaches the age of adult so that the child can claim the damages after he or she become an adult. Third, in cases of fraud. duress and other tortious activities that have existed continuously. the victim should be able to claim damages or to cancel the contract when the situation ends. even if the 10-year long-term objective limitation period has passed. Finally, the amendment of the provisions of exclusionary period in . the Korean Civil Code could be considered after a general agreement is reached for law reform in terms of the relationship between the breach of duty and the rights stemming out of encumbrances. This article discusses above points based on an analysis of Korean legal theory. Korean cases, and comparative legal research of the law of Germany, France, United States, United Kingdom, and Canada.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.901
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.004

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.243 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it