作者查詢 / lemondrink
作者 lemondrink 在 PTT [ LAW ] 看板的留言(推文), 共406則
限定看板:LAW
看板排序:
全部Gossiping1081NTU_BOTDorm2465EAseries458LAW406TAROT294NTU_BOTDorm281FuMouDiscuss205Plant198humanity160Boy-Girl149W-Philosophy147cookclub133NTU72Stock71clmusic70HatePolitics67PttLifeLaw66Philo-0657Philo-0757Examination55NTUcourse54piano39Translation35feminine_sex32cat30Desp_Housewi30wearefriends29FITNESS26PublicServan26SEX_City25CareerPlan24PublicIssue24historia20Philo-BMT20Sodagreen20Eng-Class19marriage19nCoV201918studyabroad18YAseries18gallantry17Philo-0516TY_Research16GRE14FamilyCircle13SummerCourse13NtuDormF212SAN-YanYi12Sangokumusou12TOEFL_iBT12WOW12Aries11MONSTER11NtuDormM311NtuDormM511Suckcomic11Contacts10NTU_trans10NTUDormFJr10Galaxy9Oracles9Philo-089StupidClown9Key_Mou_Pad8L_TaiwanPlaz7movie7NTUHI7NTUSA7SENIORHIGH7SpaceArt7CareerLady6Finn6FOREST_BIO6LoveLive6Artfilm5book5China-Drama5medstudent5SYSOP5TaichungBun5TransLaw5Zastrology5DJ_fightman4e-shopping4rent-exp4CATCH3Deserts3Fantasy3GIEE_983GreysAnatomy3joke3kualab3LegalTheory3PCSH91_3053Philo-study3Shima-Kosaku3tutor3WomenTalk3Aves2bookhouse2Chan_Mou2Drama2Emergency2Francais2Hsinchu2HSNU_11262Japandrama2MenTalk2novel2NTU_GoodLife2NTUGSA2NTUIB992NTUPPM-952NTUST-TX-B922prose2ShowOff2TFSHS66th3122Wen-Shan2ADS1Ancient1ask-why1B93A012XX1B961010XX1B97A013XX1backQuarter1Badminton1Barista1BeautyBody1BROADWAY1Broken-heart1CCU_talk1ClassicMusic1Create1Cross_Life1CrossStrait1CSMU-MED931DailyArticle1FCU_EE00B1Film-Club1FJU_JCS81Gintama1give1HBO1HCHS913171HCSHch13_3111home-sale1I-Lan1ISU_CSIE94B1KenShin1KS94-3071l9761MasamiTsuda1Movie-Score1mrsthis1MRT1NCHU-AGR021NCKU_CSIE931NCU95IE1NTPU-ACCM941NTUCSA1NtuDormF31NTUniNews1NUU_Talk1Old-Games1Ourmovies1PC_Shopping1PCCU_MLAW1PCCU_Talk1Philo-091poem1Printer_scan1Rent_apart1RIPE_gender1Salary1SF1specialman1Starbucks1Tech_Job1TFSHS67th3261THUIM-5th1TigerBlue1toberich1uni-talk1YP93-3061Ze1<< 收起看板(185)
18F→:那個"一般人"可否解為法官的心證範圍啊? 這似乎跟刑總07/21 03:30
19F→:的平均人理論有異曲同工之妙....07/21 03:30
45F→:h大講的我有點疑惑, 就在下所知, 最早遺棄罪的立法理由07/15 18:17
46F→:採抽象危險犯見解, 並且早期實務見解(板檢77年八月法律07/15 18:19
47F→:座談會)亦採抽象危險犯, 但近年實務已改採具體危險犯,07/15 18:20
48F→:也就是著名的87台上2395, 更近的到94年的實務見解都採07/15 18:21
49F→:具體危險犯. 可能我還沒update有請h大提供晚近見解 XD07/15 18:25
125F→:此板畢竟還是以學術討論為主的板, C大對引用文字嚴謹性07/15 06:12
126F→:的要求其實也不為過啦@@..不過大家火氣也不要太大..07/15 06:14
127F→:就一個旁觀者的感覺, 兩邊的討論似乎沒有對到焦..07/15 06:15
135F→:我被說服了 XD07/15 06:40
5F→:不知該說 是個仔細的好問題 還是該說 這樣問很特別 ..07/14 06:31
6F→:對過失責任的討論,似乎不是在於契約的"履行狀態",07/14 06:32
7F→:而是如同一樓所說是依契約的種類(ex.有償/無償)而異07/14 06:33
8F→:債各法條也分別對不同類型契約應負的責任有明確規定..07/14 06:46
4F→:我同意原po意見, 一來雷射跟噴墨印表機要弄錯似乎有困06/22 23:02
5F推:難, 二是題目未強調本題甲無過失. 綜合以上實難排除過06/22 23:05
6F→:失未在甲身上的可能.06/22 23:05
7F→:抱歉, 多了個未, 實難排除過失在甲身上的可能.06/22 23:06
8F→:不過我也有疑問, 動機錯誤和物之同一性錯誤可以分得06/22 23:08
9F→:那麼清楚嗎?? 以前就很疑惑.06/22 23:09
49F→:萬惡的蛋糕帝國!!!06/17 18:33
3F→:estoppel06/17 11:47
8F→:原本以為id的正版敗部復活了 原來是....失敬失敬 XD06/16 14:05
10F→:公海XDDDDDDDDDDDD06/16 14:05
22F→:詐欺侵害的是國家社會法益, 應該屬於非告訴乃論吧!?06/14 01:02