完全赔偿原则与侵权损害赔偿之反思及构筑

Reflection and Construction of the full compensation and damage compensation

为了排除损害赔偿中刑罚因素、限制法官的自由裁量,损害赔偿法以债权人中心主义为基础采纳了完全赔偿原则,并以差额说为理论依据欲实现对损害的完全填补。然而,完全赔偿原则的适用易造成“全赔或不赔”的二元困境,差额说的采纳也混淆了损害与损害额的作用领域,同时新近学说开始强调损害赔偿通过制裁功能而发挥的抑制作用,使得完全赔偿原则在侵权损害赔偿领域的适用存在本质的缺陷。损害赔偿法应区分为损害的赔偿范围与损害的评价两个领域,两者在规范意旨、制度功能及作用机制上实不相同。损害的赔偿范围应抛弃僵化的完全赔偿原则转而采用弹性化的判断机制,以此达致权益保障与行为自由的平衡。损害的评价领域则基于矫正正义与评价一致性的要求而应采全额评价原则。

In order to eliminate penal element, limit the judges discretion, damage compensation liability establishing on creditors centralism adopt the principle of full compensation, further regarding the interest theory as the theoretical basis to achieve full compensation. However, applying the principle of full compensation is apt to result the dilemma of dichotomy of “full compensation or no compensation”, adopting the interest theory confuses the domain of damage and the amount of damage, meanwhile the new doctrine begin to emphasize damage compensation liability to give play to the inhibiting effect by sanction. The three points make the principle of full compensation exist the intrinsic defect when applying in compensation for damage. The law of compensation for damage should be divided into two domain: the scope of damage compensation and the evaluation of damage, which have different goals of norm system functions and mechanisms. Judging the scope of damage compensation should adopt elastic flexible system and abandon the principle of full compensation, thus balancing the protection to right and interest and freedom to act. Based on corrective justice and consistent evaluation, the domain of the evaluation of damage should adopt the principle of full valuation.