【作者】 何丹；

【导师】 邓建志；

【作者基本信息】 湖南师范大学 ， 法律， 2012， 硕士

【摘要】 现代社会工伤事故时有发生,工伤事故的损害填补机制也由一元制向多元制发展。就此问题,虽然传统民法和现代劳动与社会保障法都有所提及,但是二者关系甚为紧张,司法实践中亦困难重重。为了找到工伤损害赔偿和人身损害赔偿竞合问题的解决出路,国内外学者对二者竞合问题的研究引起了广泛兴趣。国外法学界成绩显著,并逐渐形成了四种解决模式：即替代模式、兼得模式、选择模式、补充模式。相较之下,国内法学界的研究进展不大,主要停留在基础理论研究阶段。因此,本文研究的目的是：通过分析工伤损害赔偿和人身损害赔偿竞合中的冲突,探索出一种适合我国的解决模式。笔者不仅从理论方面对二者竞合的冲突给予了有力阐述,更通过例举典型案例,从实践中法官找法难、用法难、执行难等方面进行了全面分析。随后,针对该案例,笔者对郴州市100名法官进行了问卷调查,以增强本文的真实性和可靠性,为下文协调二者竞合中的冲突进行有力佐证。本文的最大亮点在于,笔者在分析工伤损害赔偿和人身损害赔偿竞合的基础理论之上,通过总结、吸收国外立法经验,从我国的基本国情出发提出一种创新性的解决模式,“替代为主并辅之以特殊情形下的补充模式”。即基于工伤损害赔偿请求权利益上的优越性和价值上的优先性,应当优先适用工伤损害赔偿请求权,采取完全的替代模式。但当有第三者或者用人单位侵权的特殊场合,受害劳动者首先基于工伤保险请求工伤损害赔偿金,不足部分再向侵权第三者或者用人单位请求补足差额。由此可见,此种模式既不像替代模式那样有违民法之公平原则,也不像纯粹的补充模式那样有“先公后私”之嫌。它的法律逻辑更加缜密可靠,更符合公平正义的法理原则。其一方面可充分保障受害职工获得完全救济的权力,发挥民事法律制度的惩戒和预防功能；另一方面又可避免受害职工获得双重利益,减轻用人单位的用工风险,节约有限社会资源。更多还原

【Abstract】 Injury accident happens from time to tome in modern industrial society, the damage mechanism of industrial injury accident also turn by union of system to multiple system development. On the subject, traditional civil law and modern labor and social security mentioned it, just this two relationship are very tense.Because the law to regulate the labor relationship go through private law, labor law, the evolution of the social security act, the application is chaos, and based on the right of claim relations happened industrial injury is involved already, choose and employ persons and laborer may involve infringement the third person, industrial injury insurance agency, during which the relationship is complex.Therefore, how to ask for compensation after suffered damage as a vulnerable groups in the laborer industrial injury become scholars of concern for the problem. The suffered workers is available only in range of industrial injury insurance compensation for personal injury or within the range to choose, or complement each other or both can have your cake and eat it? In China’s current law, although some department laws and judicial interpretation and local regulations give the rules, but because the legislation not unity, semantic ominous lead to the judicial disoriented. Based on the review DE, the U.S., Japan, New Zealand these four big developed countries and China’s in the two big compensation law based on the coordination between the legislation, With history as a mirror, using foreign law experience perfect our country industrial injury compensation system.Industrial injury compensation for damage and compensation for personal injury of the concurrence of conflict is inevitable, to coordinate the conflicts, foreign provides four solve mode, namely the alternative model, having your cake and eat it mode, selecting mode, added mode. Four models have advantages and disadvantages, which is more suitable for our country in the academic circle, launched a widely discussed. Professor zhangxinbao proposaled that alternative and complementary with special circumstances choice model; Professor GuoMingRui is claims it mode. Through the expo many theories and consider the universal and effectiveness in judicial practice, My opinion is mining alternative and complementary with special situations added mode in our country. Then, in view of the existing legislation in the defects, Inputs forward my own improvement Suggestions, such as clearing semantic, unified legislation, getting the mental damage compensation into law, and so on.更多还原