This study examines the problem of how to compensate without the need to prove the element of damage, which is the basis for which it is estimated, as the legislator assumes the existence of the damage by relieving the creditor from the burden of proof of its realization, that is, once the error occurred by the debtor, he is obliged to compensate regardless of the damage to the creditor or not, therefore, the assumption of the corner of harm is one of the exceptions that can respond to the general rules that came for certain considerations, and therefore the search for the logicality of his assumption despite the obligatory fulfillment of it leads us to establish it according to the philosophical framework on the idea The legal metaphor, since the legislator, when assuming the existence of harm, his assumption was a metaphor, given that the matter is of a high degree of possibility of verification, in addition to that this assumption was contrary to the established facts, which are represented by the legal facts represented in the exemption from the burden of proof contrary to the general origin, which necessarily entails Contradicting the natural facts, which arranged the violation of the philosophical facts, which are part of the natural facts, which were represented by the principle of non-contradiction and the principle of causation