A reconstruction of the theory of damages on civil liability from aspects of law and psychologyA Legal-psychological Restructuring of Damages Theory in Civil Liability – Toward Juridical Clinical Support for Diverse Damage Recovery
Project overview
Presentation of results and Korean survey
Kido was an organizer of a Japanese Society for Law and Psychology event held on October 25th, 2015. A workshop entitled “For a legal-psychological reconstruction of appearance-altering damages theory” at which she, Imaida, and Matsumoto each presented reports was staged, interim reports of research in progress were given, and thoughts and opinions were exchanged. These results attracted interest as cutting-edge and unprecedented research. In February of 2016, Matsumoto, Kido, Kim Sung-eun, and Imaida conducted interviews in Seoul. Intended as a study of the current state of affairs regarding Kanebo cosmetics damages in South Korea, interviews of students, graduate students, and research staff at Ewha Women’s University were undertaken to examine topics such as their view of cosmetics and image of Japanese cosmetic products. Regarding these Korean interviews, Kim Sung-eum (R-GIRO Senior researcher) contributed greatly by selecting an appropriate venue for the interviews and serving as an interpreter. Matsumoto presented an essay on the limits of past damages theory from the perspective of civil law and new research horizons that could be opened up by this collaboration between law and psychology (Matsumoto, Katsumi, “Legal and Psychological Approach to Theories of Negative Prescription and Damages: For Victim Support in Damage Compensation Demands,” Ritsumeikan University Journal of Human Sciences No 33 (February, 2016) pp. 3-33.
Development going forward
In connection to the lawsuit in Kyoto mentioned above, with Kido taking the lead the team plans to write an opinion statement regarding damages theory from the perspective of the psychology of cosmetics. The victims and their lawyers have high expectations of this putting into words of the victims’ actual perception of damages from a psychological perspective that differs from that of jurists.
