被监护人，缺乏判断能力，若广泛参与社会生活，既是社会弱势群体，又容易引发危险和损害。被监护人侵权的责任承担，关系弱势者的保护和被害人的救济，关系被监护人利益和他人利益、社会利益的协调，是民法学研究的一个重要内容。本文从比较法的视角入手，借鉴一些国家和地区立法的通性和个性，通过对我国现有立法的解释和分析，提出了引入责任能力制度以及被监护人侵权的民事责任承担的制度建构。本文第一章“引言”界定了本文的研究范围、意义、目的、结构和内容。本文第二章“被监护人的侵权责任能力研究”与第三章“被监护人对其侵权行为民事责任的承担”认为，被监护人对其侵权行为承担责任，应当以“过错”为构成要件。判断过错的前提是他们具有侵权责任能力，即民事责任能力，其判断标准应当依据识别能力的有无。所谓识别能力，为行为人主观状态的考察，并无客观标准，应就个案认定。被监护人的过错的认定，通常应当按照客观标准。并可由法官依据诚实信用原则依据自由裁量权，对特殊识别能力的人适用主观标准。第四章“监护人责任”分析了我国《民法通则》第133条的规定，认为监护人责任仅采用无过错责任原则，亦未规定衡平责任。经过分析，本文提出，监护人责任应采用过错（推定）责任原则，辅以衡平责任。监护人免责适宜从宽认定。监护职责非经过法定程序不得发生转移，因此，监护人以外的负有照管义务的人，并不承担监护责任。基于债之关系的相对性，虽其未尽照管义务，但不依债务不履行对债之关系之外的第三人承担其照管之下的被监护人侵权行为的后果，除非法律对此作了突破性的规定。此为第五章“非监护人的照管义务与被监护人侵权责任的承担”的主要内容。第六章“结语”是对全文观点的总结。

The persons under guardianship are disadvantaged people and, if taking an active role in social activities, they tend to bring harm and damages to others. Therefore the theme of “civil responsibility for tort of the person under guardianship” is an important field in civil law studies, as it may influence not only the protection of the disadvantaged and the remedy of the victims, but also the balance of interests among the people under guardianship, the victims and the society.This paper will, from a comparative law perspective, use the experiences and theories of certain counties and regions for reference. It will then interpret and analyze the relevant rules of China, and bring forward some suggestions on the introduction of the capacity for responsibility system and the establishment of the system to regulate the assumption of civil responsibility by the person under guardianship.Chapter 1, Introduction, identifies the research scope, and introduces the significance, purpose and contents of this paper.Chapter 2, Study on the Capacity for Responsibility of the Person under Guardianship, and Chapter 3, Assumption of the Civil Responsibility of Tort by the Person under Guardianship, conclude the person under guardianship should be liable for his tort if he has “fault”. Capacity for responsibility of tort, or capacity for civil responsibility, estimated by one’s capacity of discernment, is the basis to judge his fault. The capacity of discernment should be cognized on a case-to-case basis.Generally speaking, it should take the objective standard to judge whether the person under guardianship has fault. Judges can also, by using their discretion, adopt a subjective standard under good faith to decide cases involving people with special capacity.Chapter 4, Study on the Responsibility of Guardian, analyzes Art. 133 of the General Principles of the Civil Law of the P. R. China, and indicates that the guardian should, according to the principle of “liability without fault”, be responsible for the tort of the person under his or her guardianship. And Art. 133 does not stipulate the equitable liability. This paper argues that the legislators of China should adopt the principle of “liability for fault” on the guardian’s responsibility and the equitable liability. The judges should not cognize the responsibility of the guardian strictly.The duty of guardianship can only be transferred according to legal proceedings. Therefore, the persons who are not the guardians and have a duty of guard shall not assume the responsibility of guardianship. According to the relative characteristics of the obligation, these people should not be held responsible to the victim whose damages are caused by the person under guardianship who is just under the guard of them, unless the law otherwise provides. This is the main content of the Chapter 5, Duty of Guard out of Guardianship and the Assumption of the Responsibility for the Tort of the Person under Guardianship.Chapter 6, Conclusion, summarizes the views of the author in this paper.