Compensation Or Prevention

triggered all kinds of arguments when it appeared before the people by the posture of humanism and protecting the vulnerable. Its rights and wrongs were caused all by article 76 of it. The article 76 stipulated two basic rules: doctrine of liability fixation of motor vehicle violations and compulsory insurance. But we must review and reconstruct from the goal of the system design. Several points are discussed in this paper from the aspects of the objective and system design perspective of Motor Vehicle Accidents Act:Chapter 1: introduction. In this part, the article introduces a major system design of the 76th Road Safety Act and the confusion caused by the implementation of it. The function of it is enough; on the contrary, the prevention of it is inadequate.Chapter 2: goal and function of the 76th Road Safety Act. At first, the article introduces the development of tort law—from prevention to prevention and compensation. Then, the article exposes the goal and function, which is focus on prevention while promoting compensation from the aspects of legislative intent, background, process and context.Chapter 3: interpretation of the 76th Road Safety Act. Firstly, the article introduces several opinions of doctrine of liability fixation of motor vehicle violations and compulsory insurance by legal circles, then evaluates and analyses about it and makes the conclusion that the act established the insurance of liability without fault, and applies it accidents between motor vehicles, pedestrians and non-motorized.Chapter 4: merits and shortages of the 76th Road Safety Act. The article explains the merits of Road Safety Act, which is it fully embody the humanism from the aspects of liability without fault it established, the compulsory third party insurance of motor vehicle and the road traffic accident social relief fund. At the mean time, it realizes deterrent anticipated by the way of punishment. Then, the article explains the shortages of it from the aspects of strict ion of liability without fault, difficulties of implementation and all kinds of social problems caused by it.Chapter 5: suggestion of consummating the 76th Road Safety Act. The article makes the conclusion that it should obstacle pedestrians to suitable prevention by applying liability without fault for traffic accidents between motor vehicles, pedestrians and non-motorized, and then make traffic accidents increase and can't achieve the goals by economic analysis for doctrine of liability fixation of motor vehicle accidents. At last, the article analyses the rationality of applying strict liability for accidents between motor vehicles, pedestrians and non-motorized and makes the conclusion that it should lead to balance between prevention and compensation by using strict responsibility.