본 연구는 양발 착지 시 성별에 따른 상해 경험이 무릎과 엉덩관절의 움직임 및 수직 지면반력에 미치는 영향을 분석하는데 목적이 있었다. 20대 남성 20명(상해 경험 8명, 비상해 경험 12명), 여성 20명(상해 경험 11명, 비상해 경험 9명)을 연구대상자로 선정하였다. 높이 45cm 박스에서 양발 착지를 통해 얻어진 운동역학적 변인을 Two-way mixed ANOVA를 실시하였으며, bonferroni adjustment를 이용하여 사후검증 하였다(p<.05). 본 연구결과 상해를 경험한 여성 그룹은 무릎 관절의 외반 및 내측회전 그리고 엉덩관절의 굴곡 및 외측회전 운동을 증가시켜 최대 수직 지면반발력의 감소를 유도할 수 있었던 것으로 판단된다. 상해를 경험하지 않은 여성 그룹의 경우 최대 무릎 굴곡각도가 가장 작게 나타났을 뿐만 아니라 엉덩관절의 굴곡과 외측회전 각도에서 가장 적은 수치를 나타내었고 최대 수직 지면반발력은 가장 높게 나타났다. 반면, 상해를 경험하지 않은 여성 INE 그룹의 경우 IE 그룹에 비해 상대적으로 무릎과 엉덩관절을 활용하지 못함으로서 높은 수직 지면반발력을 나타내었고, 이는 상대적으로 상해 위험성에 많이 노출되어 있음을 의미한다. 따라서 성별에 따른 상해 경험이 무릎과 엉덩관절의 운동과 최대 수직 지면반발력의 크기에 요인들에 영향을 주는 요인들임을 알 수 있었다.

In case of injury during a sports game, to punish the offender without exception might lead to withering of sports activities, whereas to get the offender exempted on the mere ground that injury occurred in the course of a sports game might cause plummeting of either legal stability or law-abiding spirit. So, it is vital to draw a bright line between criminal liability and moral obligation with regard to injury during a sports game. Scholars suggest the theory of victim's consent, the theory of tolerated danger, the theory of social reasonableness or the theory of non-legal issue as sources of justification to limit criminal liability. Each theory has its own merits and demerits. In order to punish the offender who inflicted injury by negligence during a sports game, general requirements of 'infliction of injury by negligence' occurrence of injury, ― causal relationship between offender's act and injury, breach of objective duty of care, etc.― should be met. Objective duty of care can be derived from statutes, past practices, social norm, logic, empirical rule or court decisions. In a sports game however, rules of the game may be the most important source of objective duty of care. As rules of the game enumerate matters that require attention in the entire course of a sports game, player's act against these rules can be treated breach of objective duty of care. It is excessive to deem all of the acts against rules of the game, including minor ones, breach of objective duty of care in light of the way a sports game is played as well as autonomy enjoyed in the sports field. Unless injury resulted from the act that had gone against rules of the game beyond reasonable expectation, the offender should not be found to breach objective duty of care. Rules of the game differ from type to type. In so-called type of rivalry sports games, rules of the game, while allowing the player or the team to make physical attack on the opponent to some extent, focus on diminishing or eliminating the possibility of injury. In so-called type of individual sports games, rules of the game prohibit dangerous act and call the attention of the players to avoid injury. To sum up, breach of rules may be treated more harshly and less flexibly in type of individual sports games than in type of rivalry sports games. The judgment under review in this paper has something to do with golf game, which belongs to type of individual sports games. The judgment thinks highly of rules of the game as source of objective duty of care. It also denies criminal liability in case of injury resulting from minor breach of rules of the game, which would reasonably be expected. On the face of it, the judgment seems to adopt the theory of social reasonableness. However, considering the courts usually dub social rule social reasonableness, the view taken by the judgment might be different from the theory of social reasonableness advocated by the scholars. The theory of social reasonableness relates to negation of applicability of criminal statute, whereas the view taken by the judgment might relate to negation of illegality. In such type of individual sports games as golf, the players enjoy game without physical contact with other participants, expecting reciprocal care to avoid unwanted injury. So it is somewhat improper to adopt the theory of victim's consent as source of justification to limit criminal liability in golf game. The judgment, in similar context, seems to have dismissed defense of 'victim's consent' raised by the accused. Even in case that the offender is held liable for infliction of injury by negligence with regard to injury during a sports game, the possibility to get relief is still open. If the offender reaches an agreement with the victim, he or she is able to avoid criminal punishment according to Art. 266 Para. 2 of the Penal Code.

본 연구는 운동스트레스, 사회적 지원, 대처기술과 운동상해의 빈도나 정도간에 어떠한 인과 관계가 있는지 알아보고자 하였다. 이러한 목적을 수행하기 위하여 광주·전남 지역의 전국체전 대표선수로 선발된 377명을 운동스트레스, 사회적 지원, 대처기술, 운동상해의 빈도와 정도를 조사하였다. 그 결과 운동스트레스와 대처기술만이 유의한 상관(p<.05)이 나왔고, 다른 변인간에는 상관이 없었다. 그리고 세변인 즉, 운동스트레스, 사회적 지원, 대처기술이 운동상해의 빈도를 설명하는 전체 변량은 1.6%(R2)이었고, 상해 정도를 설명하는 변량은 2.5%(R2) 이었다. 마지막으로 운동스트레스를 독립변인, 사회적 지원과 대처기술을 매개변인, 운동상해의 빈도와 정도를 종속변인으로 설정하여 각 변인별 인과분석(경로 분석)을 한 결과 운동스트레스와 대처기술만이 인고관계가 있었고, 다른 변인간에는 관계가 없는 것으로 나타났다. 따라서, 상해 발생원인을 찾는 향후 연구에서는 기술적인 병인학과 분석적인 병인학에 관심을 가지고 접근하는 것이 더 합리적인 것으로 판단된다.