【作者】 黄静；

【导师】 喻敏； 辜明安；

【作者基本信息】 西南财经大学 ， 民商法学， 2007， 硕士

【摘要】 死亡赔偿一直以来不仅是学界、实务界关注的焦点,也是人们时常谈论的话题。生命侵害事件发生以后往往会引起人们对侵权人的道德谴责和对死者遗属的深切同情。生命权是每个人享有的基本权利,尊重自己和他人的生命不仅是社会对每个人的基本道德要求,更是每个人的法律义务。当生命的侵权事件发生时,人们通常的最初反应是对侵权人夺人生命的义愤和谴责,而不是即刻想到死亡赔偿。因为对于被害人停止的生命,事后的死亡赔偿无法给予救济。死亡赔偿和其他人身损害赔偿最大的区别就源于此。在某种意义上,死亡赔偿并非真正的人身损害赔偿,就在于生命侵权的特殊性:①被害人的生命损害不具有事实上可赔性。②死者并不具有民事权利能力。被害人死亡时,即丧失民事主体资格,不再享有人身损害赔偿的权利。因此,死者不能作为自己人身损害赔偿的权利主体。③生命侵权的损害后果,被分成被害人生命的丧失和由此所导致的被害人遗属的损害,包括遗属的财产损害和非财产损害。死亡赔偿并非对被害人及其生命损害的赔偿,而是对因被害人生命受侵害而同时造成的被害人遗属现实损害的赔偿。死亡赔偿制度就是对死者遗属固有损害的法律确认,并以死者遗属具体的财产损害和非财产损害为赔偿的范围和对象,从而维护和保障死者遗属受损的利益。如何才能对死者遗属的损害提供完整、充分的赔偿救济,使他们的利益得到切实的法律保护,则成为死亡赔偿制度必须紧紧围绕的主题。我国死亡赔偿制度二十年来的发展,已经确立了死亡赔偿制度的基本结构体系,为死者遗属所遭受的损害提供了比较全面的赔偿项目。但是,死亡赔偿制度本身在一些赔偿事项的规定上仍然存在着不同程度的缺陷,其中一些问题由来已久,尚未得到妥当的解决。由于一些明显不合理规定的存在,影响了死亡赔偿制度的实施效果,据此的判决并不具有服众的权威性,导致当事人明知起诉或上诉会被驳回而依然起诉或上诉的情形时有发生。一些影响较大的初审案件和上诉案件,更是引发了社会公众对死亡赔偿制度中不合理规定的强烈不满,从而制约了现有死亡赔偿制度的有效运行。本文认为我国死亡赔偿制度中的一些问题长久得不到妥当的解决,是由于我国死亡赔偿的理论研究的不足和社会心理调查的缺乏。在此情境下,对于死亡赔偿制度的理论研究与实证研究就具有重要的现实意义。因此,本文拟以死亡赔偿制度理论层面的研究为先导,再进入到对我国死亡赔偿制度规范制度层面的反思和完善阶段,最后展开死亡赔偿制度操作层面相关问题的探讨。通过死亡赔偿制度理论层、规范层、操作层三位一体的综合研究,力图完善我国的死亡赔偿制度,并尽可能妥当地解决我国死亡赔偿制度运行中的存在的常见问题。全文分四章进行论述:第一章“死亡赔偿原理的历史演变”,本章在全文中具有前导性地位,着眼于死亡赔偿制度形成前不同赔偿机制的基本原理,即对赔偿的目的动机、性质功能、赔偿机制在历史发展中的流变进行分析。通过对初民社会、古代社会、现代死亡赔偿原理的探讨和推论,确立死亡赔偿基础理论遗属本位的立场。第二章“死亡赔偿制度的基础理论”,本章在全文中具有基础性地位。在第一章推导的基础上,围绕遗属本位的立场,分别以“死亡赔偿请求权的形成基础”、“死亡赔偿请求权的内容”与“无遗属死亡赔偿的赔付机制”三部分作为基础理论体系上的连接点展开论证。这和传统的基础理论研究有着较大的区别:在结构上,将基础理论划分为三大部分:一是将权利基础和权利内容分开进行论述;二是增加了“无遗属死亡赔偿的赔付机制”作为支撑本文基础理论不可或缺的部分各部分间形成层次分明,步步推进的梯状结构。在内容上,第一部分“死亡赔偿请求权的形成基础”的论述具有两大特点:第一,指出身份基础对于死亡赔偿的特别意义,并对死亡赔偿请求权的身份基础和非身份基础进行论证,说明请求权主体由身份主体和非身份主体构成。身份主体主要是死者的遗属,其请求权基于血缘和家庭共同生活关系而取得。非身份主体包括和死者具有其他重大利益关系者以及本与死者无利益关系,但是因发生与被害人死亡事件直接相关的特定情形的金钱支出而取得求偿主体资格的权利人。第二个特点在于确立了不同身份遗属的请求权顺序。第二部分“死亡赔偿请求权的内容”在死亡赔偿的基础理论中尤为重要。因为在赔偿权利主体明确后,即进入损害赔偿求偿阶段,赔哪些、怎么赔、赔多少都需要在“死亡赔偿请求权的内容”中得以确立。这部分的思路仍然以遗属本位为指导思想,区分遗属的财产损害和非财产损害先后进行论述。在财产损害赔偿中,论述内容并不限于对传统赔偿项目的一般理解,而是进一步探讨了传统赔偿项目理论研究中还存在的问题。比如,当存在共同扶养义务人时,受扶养人、侵权人以及共同扶养人之间在扶养费赔偿上的关系、继承利益赔偿金和死者生前债权人的关系等等。在非财产损害赔偿中,本文不宥于传统理论的相关研究:一是将精神损害赔偿的赔偿主体分为法定和事实推定权利主体两类,并就赔偿数额的确定问题构想出同种类型的权利主体获得同等赔偿的赔偿模式。二是在遗属的精神损害赔偿之外,首次以“生命的象征性赔偿金”确立了满足死亡赔偿平等性需求的赔偿项目。第三部分“无遗属死亡赔偿的赔付机制”一节中,探讨了无遗属的被害人死亡情形时,无遗属参与的死亡赔偿的几种可能情形。对弥补相关案件审理中的法律空白,具有现实的指导意义。第三章“我国死亡赔偿制度的反思和完善——以基础理论为参照”,这部分致力于死亡赔偿制度规范层面的探讨,是第二章死亡赔偿理论研究的目的所在。本章以《最高人民法院关于审理人身损害赔偿案件适用法律若干问题的解释》为主要评价对象,就其中的赔偿权利主体、赔偿关系、赔偿项目、赔偿标准等方面存在的问题从内容实质性的和标准技术性的两个角度作了细致的分析。其中,尤其关注死亡赔偿金性质的争论以及赔偿金计算标准上城镇居民和农村居民“二元身份标准”的确立在制度运行过程产生的负面影响。本章首先简要的评述我国死亡赔偿制度的发展以及死亡赔偿制度的发展趋势;然后指出我国死亡赔偿制度上存在的问题以及问题的特殊性,并对死亡赔偿制度的统一、死亡赔偿金的性质、赔偿标准、精神损害赔偿数额的确定依据、某些赔偿项目的权利主体不明确等问题逐个进行反思、检讨;最后以第二章死亡赔偿制度的基础理论为参照开凿解决问题的途径,对我国死亡赔偿制度的规定进行调整和完善。第四章“我国死亡赔偿制度运行中常见问题的探讨——走出疑难案件的困境”,在第二章和第三章先后进行了死亡赔偿制度理论层面和规范层面的研究后,本章将着眼于制度操作层面上死亡赔偿具体案件的审理过程中所面临的问题。诸如社会高度关注和争议颇多的“同命不同价”、“撞伤不如撞死的潜规则”、“谁来为死亡流浪汉维权”、“医疗救治费谁来付”等问题。关于这些争议问题的案件,各地法院、各级法院在审理上并没有形成一致的判决。作为本文的最后一章,本章将结合以这些争议问题为代表的有影响力的案件,以前两章形成的相关理论观点和制度建议作为解决这些案件中争议问题的出发点和基本思路。做这篇文章,希望能使人们形成对死亡赔偿制度的正确认识,并能对死亡赔偿制度在生命侵害时救济的有限性和不完整性予以包容。同时也希望在制度运行过程中,当特殊案件的审理上出现“法律空白”时,法官能够同时考虑死亡赔偿制度的法理和制度运行的社会效果,推导出审判本案件的正当适用依据,不会以现有制度缺少相关的明文规定,而耽误受害人实现合理的赔偿请求。死亡赔偿的法律制度并不是万能的,生命侵害剥夺了个人“生存”的权利,进而终止了他“生活、发展、创造”的一切可能,因此被视为人之最高利益的侵害。这一侵权事实甚至可能导致一系列不确定的社会危害后果。但是,死亡赔偿制度并不对死者、死者的生命以及不确定的社会损害提供补救途径,它所关注的是在被害人不幸提前死亡时,与死者直接具有物质和精神利益联系的遗属所遭受的具体损害以及损害的性质和表现形态。死亡赔偿制度的目的不在于对死者及其停止的生命能做些什么,而在于对“人”提供救济,即保障“活着的人”——死者的遗属在物质和精神损害得到补偿后继续正常生活和发展的利益。同时也警示“活着的人们”——尊重他人的生命,像珍惜自己的生命那样。更多还原

【Abstract】 Death compensation has always been not only has been a common topic as well as a focus of domestic education and practice. Its differences from other right infringement damage compensation are: first, the case of death compensation, right infringement remedial treatment "recover to original condition" is not suitable; the passed-away lives cannot be recovered or continued. Second, the dead victim cannot join the compensation request. The compensation request is started by surviving families of the deceased. Third, harm of the life infringement is reflected in the form that the victim’s loss of life is separated with the loss of his/her surviving families. In fact, the former one can not be compensation, but the latter may be, and that is the core of death compensation system. The present compensation system certainly had not achieved a good effect. Many decisions do not have authority to the audience .Sometimes the litigant knows the appeal would be rejected but still mentions it. Some first trial cases and appeal cases arouse intense disaffection of the public to the unreasonable stipulations of this system, forming pressure and the resistance to the the existing death compensation system.Research to the death compensation has prominent practical significance under this circumstance. But if we want to achieve a permanent effect, we must carry on a comprehensive and systematic study in theoretical, systematical and operational levels of present death compensation system, not just surface study. We must find the defect of death compensation system before making any amendment. We find it is the lack of fundamental research and social psychology investigation of death compensation. First, through rationale research of death compensation system, we carry on discussion of dis-compensability of life and non- right subject of the dead, clarify the base of the compensation theory and construct the death compensation system. From this we come to the compensation system of“surviving families of the deceased standard". Next, through psychological inspection to the social public cognition to death compensation, we believe the infringement damage compensation principle and the traditional human sentiment. Finally, we want to get such effect: On one hand, accurately localize problems in present system as well as factors affecting operation of this system, and carry on amendment according to related theory; on the other hand, propose feasible suggestion to make up the blank on our try in special cases.The full text is divided into four chapters:The first chapter“historical evolution of the death compensation principle”, is the leading chapter, focuses on basic principles of the death compensation system and carries on analysis to the compensation’s motivation, its function and nature, changes of the compensation mechanism in the history. Starting from this point, we carry on discussion and the inference to death compensation principle of the initial society, the ancient times and the modern times. We believe that the dead victim does not have right to make any compensation request, so we establish the compensation theory of surviving families of deceased standard.Second chapter“basic theory of the death compensation system", is the foundational chapter of this text. On basis of inferential reasoning in the first chapter, from the standpoint of surviving families of the deceased, discuss respectively "foundation of the damage compensation request", " content of the damage compensation request " and " compensation mechanism with no surviving family of the deceased ". This is obviously different from the traditional theory: In form, the theory is divided into three major parts, with each part being an independent sub-structure. The three parts are clearly demarcated, and advance step by step. The former theories have no certain systematic structure, and only carry on theory research and analysis to some problems in the system. In content, we discuss the right basis and the right content separately and add" compensation mechanism with no surviving family of the deceased”as an indispensable part. Explaining the three parts specifically, the first part "foundation of the damage compensation request" has two major characteristics: First, it points out the special significance of status basis to death compensation system, discusses on status basis and the non- status basis of request of death compensation, explains that request subject is constituted by status subject and the non- status subject. The subject status is based on blood relationship or family membership. The subject non- status does not have legal relations but other significant benefit relations with the dead; or has no relations with the dead initially but obtains the status in the damage compensation process because of money payment in specific conditions. The second characteristic lays in request order and distribution principle of different status. In "content of the damage compensation request”chapter, it reviews traditional research content of compensation request like funeral expenses, nurture spends, inherits benefit and comfort funds at first, and pays attention to existing problems. Secondly, it develops new field of death compensation request, analysis careful evaluation to the non- traditional compensation benefit, like biology damage compensation, the punitive compensation, and compensation of lost anticipated life enjoyment and so on, then proposes the concept of“symbolic price of life”. In the“compensation mechanism with no surviving family of the deceased "chapter, we discussed the situation of dead victim with no surviving family, the injurer undertake responsibility in several ways. It makes up the case blank of this situation and has significance in daily life.The third chapter "review of our country’s death compensation system - -taking compensation theory as reference“is the conclusion of the whole text. It carries on research of the death compensation system, which is the final goal of previous discussion. This chapter takes "Supreme People’s Court’s Explanations on suitable laws to Certain Questions in Personal Damage compensation Case”as the main object, discuss from the technical and content aspects existing questions in subject of compensation, compensation relations, kinds of compensation, compensation standard, etc. Among them, we pay special attention to "dual standard”in cities and the countryside, which has deeply influenced process of death compensation system. To solve this problem, we analyses the feasibility of“symbolic price of life "in compensation process.To be specific, this chapter first briefly comments on development of our country’s death compensation system, reflecting tendency of death compensation development. Then explained existing problems and its the specialty of the death compensation system in our country, emphasis unification of death compensation system, nature of the death indemnity, principle of psychiatry damage compensation, subject of the compensation right; Finally, seek solutions to the problem under basic law theory and research. From aspects of adjustment of compensation issue, clarification of compensation right subject and coordinating stipulation of common law and special law on death compensation, unifying system process and media guidance, we came to a final solution.The death compensation system after adjustment should be more perfect in clearer function and localization of principle, principle coherency, and accurate explanation of concept obtains. It can lead the public to correct understanding of death compensation in trial practice. The fourth chapter“common problems of death compensation system in our country ", will focus on problems in concrete cases (namely in the operation level) of death compensation. The society pays a lot attention to the disputable "same life different prices", invisible rules of“death damage better than injury damage", " compensation payer for the death of tramps ", " payer of medical service expenses " and so on. All levels of courts have not reach consistent decision on these disputable cases. As last chapter of this article, the fourth chapter will take these disputable problems as representatives cases, use related viewpoints and principle suggestion in previous chapters as starting point and basic methods in solving these cases.Since the present death compensation system is not perfect. We hope this article can give people better understanding of death compensation, and can understand exceptional situations the present compensation system cannot cover or take into consideration. We also hoped when meeting "legal blanks”in process of this system, we can infer right judicial accordance using legal principle and theory of death compensation. Then we’ll not interrupt the victim and all formidable sponsors’realization of reasonable compensation request when "surpassing" the existing system. Life damage has deprived individuals’rights of surviving, simultaneously terminated all his/her possibility of”live, progress, and create". Therefore it is regarded as the severest right violation of an individual.This right infringement may possibly cause series of indefinite damage to society. But the death compensation system does not provide compensation to the dead, the lost life as well as the indefinite damage to society. It only pays attention to concrete harm as well as the nature and appearance of harm to the direct correlated or spiritually related surviving families of the deceased when the victim died unfortunately ahead of time. The intention of this system is not to make up for the dead or the lost lives, but to give relief to the livings, to safeguard surviving family of the deceased’s right to continue their normal life and development in material and spiritual demand. At the same time, it also tells the "livings" to respect other peoples’lives just like one cherish his own..更多还原