食品安全法的惩罚性赔偿

发布时间：2018-12-10 09:35

【摘要】：2015年10月1日,新《食品安全法》正式施行,新食品安全法在旧食品安全法的基础上,做了大幅的修改。其中最吸睛的便是由旧法第九十六条演化而来的新法第一百四十八条第二款的规定。这一修订是在基于旧法第96条的基础上的进一步完善,其修订使我国食品安全的惩罚性赔偿制度更切合实际,也更加灵活。但是,新法在主体范围的界定,主观要件的认定,违法行为的标准及赔偿金额的确定和但书的具体规定方面依然存在不足。本文将分析上述不足之处,并针对这些不足提出完善方法。本文分为六个部分。导论部分主要阐述论文选题依据,并简要分析论文的研究方案。论文第一部分探讨了《食品安全法》惩罚性赔偿的适用主体。由于旧法第九十六条和新法第一百四十八条对惩罚性赔偿主体的范围均未做出清晰明确的界定,因而本部分以全面保护消费者利益为出发点,对“消费者”这一概念重新界定,并对加工联合生产者的责任区分、销售者和网络第三方平台的责任进行了探究。第二部分探讨了《食品安全法》惩罚性赔偿的主观要件。笔者认为食品安全惩罚性赔偿中对销售者关于“明知”的认定方法仍旧含糊不清,且未将重大过失列入惩罚性赔偿的主观要件之中。第三部分探讨了适用惩罚性赔偿的违法行为。由于食品安全法对此的规定比较混乱,本文以生活中最常见的两个现象,即预包装食品求偿问题及买一赠一之赠品问题,来说明判断违法行为的标准,并提出将欺诈行为列入惩罚性赔偿的行为标准。第四部分探讨了食品安全惩罚性赔偿的范围,主要探讨惩罚性赔偿金的计算原则与基数,并分析惩罚性赔偿金的参考因素。第五部分探讨了《食品安全法》惩罚性赔偿问题中新食品安全法中第一百四十八条第二款中的但书的法律适用的具体规定。
[Abstract]:On October 1, 2015, the new Food Safety Law was put into effect, and the new Food Safety Law was greatly amended on the basis of the old Food Safety Law. One of the most attractive is the new section 148, paragraph 2, which evolved from the old section 96. This amendment is a further improvement based on Article 96 of the old Law, which makes the punitive damages system of food safety in our country more practical and flexible. However, there are still shortcomings in the definition of the scope of the subject, the determination of subjective elements, the standard of illegal acts, the determination of compensation amount and the specific provisions of the proviso. This paper will analyze the above deficiencies, and put forward a perfect method for these deficiencies. This paper is divided into six parts. The introduction mainly explains the basis of selecting the topic of the thesis, and briefly analyzes the research scheme of the paper. The first part of the paper discusses the application of punitive damages in Food Safety Law. As the scope of punitive damages is not clearly defined in Article 96 of the old Law and Article 148 of the New Law, the concept of "Consumer" is redefined in this part based on the comprehensive protection of the interests of consumers. It also explores the responsibility of processing joint producers, sellers and network third-party platforms. The second part discusses the subjective elements of punitive damages in Food Safety Law. The author thinks that the method of "knowing" in the punitive damages for food safety is still vague, and the gross negligence is not included in the subjective elements of punitive damages. The third part discusses the illegal behavior of applying punitive damages. As the provisions of the Food Safety Law are quite confused, this article uses the most common phenomena in life, namely, the question of prepackaged food claims and the issue of buying one, one free gift, to explain the criteria for judging illegal acts. And puts forward the behavior standard that the fraud is included in the punitive damages. The fourth part discusses the scope of food safety punitive damages, mainly discusses the calculation principle and base of punitive damages, and analyzes the reference factors of punitive damages. The fifth part discusses the application of the proviso in the second paragraph of Article 148 of the new Food Safety Law in the punitive damages of the Food Safety Law.
【学位授予单位】：江西师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D922.16

【参考文献】