The Health care program in Korea has now been systemized after 30 years of declaring the inauguration of the national health insurance system by the current government. The national health care covering all Korean citizens was achieved after 12 years of implementing the national health insurance and the health care program since 1977. Hundreds of multiple operational agencies managing the insured individually had undergone the amalgamation process from 1998 to 2000, and had been restructured as one agency, the National Health Insurance Corporation. In 2003, the community/area based financial management was also merged together with the employment based financial management. The National health care system of Korea offer various merits, compared with that of other countries, such as health care provision covering all Koreans, low insurance premium, accessibility of medical services/facilities etc. However, there are still some weak features which need to be addressed for improvement; below expectation insurance cover system, mistrust on the medical services, low medical charges resulted from excessive restrictions, and unstable financial status of the national health insurance etc. Therefore, the National health care system should continue to evolve to re-establish itself as more effective national health care system by further strengthening its merits, and by improving its weaknesses; with adopting the positive system to optimize the costs of prescribed medicines/drugs, applying simpler insurance coverage system to calculate the optimum medical charges, promoting private medical insurances, and increasing insurance premium etc.

Health insurance has gone far toward solving Korea's health related problems through thirty years. Health Insurance as social security system has a role of national system to secure national health. But there are many problems in health insurance. There is a dispute about many issues, coverage of health security, compulsory appointment of health insurance organization, coverage and level of health insurance benefit, decisionmaking right of health insurance price, examination of health insurance etc. Generally, the opinion for health insurance policy to be leaded by nation sets against the opinion to be leaded by private sector. It is necessary to study politics of law, constitute law and comparative law for rational solving these problems. If desirable setting of health law system can be made, legal system must be set during a long time and be discussed synthetically in different standpoint.

In providing general medical treatments, the medical service contract between the patient and the doctor is the mutually responsible onerous contract. However, the nature of the mutually assumed contract standings of the patient and the doctor has been changing since the implementation of the national health insurance program. For instance, besides the cases of beyond excessive medical charges and medical negligence, if the doctor charged for his/her medical treatments violating the post-treatment/nursing cover criteria, the overpaid medical charge, regardless of being collected with the patient's consent, has to be refunded back to the patient. Medically needed aspects, treatment results, and unfair benefits favoring the patient are not at all taken into consideration in the health insurance scheme. This makes it easier for patients to get refunds for their share of the medical payments by involving the Health Insurance Review & Assessment Service or the National Health Insurance Corporation, without engaging in civil law suits (for reimbursement claim) against doctors. In other words, the doctor's responsibility to provide medical treatments and the patient's responsibility to pay for the medical treatment provided within the contractual realm are being demolished by the administrational arbitration of the National Health Insurance system. The basic rights of medical service providers, and the patient's right to choose are as important constitutional rights, as the National Health Insurance program, which is essential in the social welfare system. Furthermore, the development of the medical fields should not be prevented by the National Health Insurance system. If the medical treatment services can be divided into necessary treatments, general treatments, and high quality treatments, the National Health Insurance is supposed to guarantee the necessary and general treatments to provide medical treatments equally to all the insured with limited financial resources. However, for the high quality treatments, it is recommended that they should not be interfered by the National Health Insurance system, and that they should be left to the private contract between the patient and the doctor.

Improving the formal objection system regarding reviewing medical expenses requires authority and confidence in the aspect of well-functioning the health insurance review and assessment system, legally and appropriately. The purposes of improvement of the formal objection system should aim for protecting the people's right of health. On handling the formal objections, the disputes of the rights should be settled economically and promptly by fairness, specialty, and objectivity in the health insurance review and assessment administration. Therefore, in order to promote the administrative specialty of health insurance, the formal objection committee needs to be organized independently and guaranteed expertly. Under the current formal objection system, however, the organization of committee lacks right-relief function, recognition and public relation as a health insurance appeal system, and related professional man powers. It is also analyzed that there are several controversial points, such as mass deliberation to the formal objection committee and its conference procedure. As a measure of improvement, it is analyzed that the committee needs to be organized independently with a proper number of professional man powers. The strict deliberation procedures and the prohibition of the decision-making by non-conference are also required to be empowered. The formal objection procedure provides the beneficiaries and the claims legitimately, so that it secures the legal relations on the health insurance system. Therefore, on the conference process of formal objection, the expert and guaranteed protection should be provided promptly, and its procedures to the appellants should also be assisted kindly.

Medical demand has been increased explosively since health insurance was introduced in 1977. Person has taken a growing interest in increase of medical service supply while that period. We must understand the legal aspects of medical quality management. There have been many legislative efforts for securing the right of patient. Patient's legal right is secured through the declaration of patient's right and all hospital person deal with patients according to the standard and criterion of the declaration of patient's right. The patient's right is set up on a basis of the right to live and the expectation right of patient. It is important to prevent medical accidents because the right of patient's health is violated by medical accident. We must manage well the medical quality to prevent the medical accident. The effort to escalate the medical quality is the best method to decrease the medical dispute. Nowadays a person take a growing interest medical quality. Our government make an effort to secure the medical quality through the legal system to be contained health organization evaluation system.

It is a general principle that the plaintiff takes burden of proof about negligence and causation in a civil compensation litigation. And it is the same in a medical malpractice lawsuit. Korean courts have made diverse efforts to mitigate the plaintiff's duty to prove in medical malpractice lawsuits under the name of justice and impartiality. One of those theoretical attempt is 'presumption of causation'. The Supreme Court, since 1995, has developed a new logic for the theory of 'presumption of causation' which is characterized by a phrase "layman's common sense". The Court presumes the defendant's negligence and causation when the plaintiff alleges and proves the facts which can be pointed out and expressed by a layman with common sense. And if the defendant fails to prove that the result was caused by other fact than own medical activities, the defendant shall be defeated. I realize that this theory has problem for justice and impartiality. I would say that two fators should be considered and added to this logic. First,are defendant's acts generally belonging to gross negligence which would cause that kind of bad result? Second, is it recognized that there would be the causation generally and statistically between the cause and the result?

In Korea, abortion in the Criminal Law is an illegal act in exception of limited cases stated in the Mother and the Child Health Law. There are grounds on which abortion may be carried out - though the grounds are very limited and related such as emergency situation of woman's physical health, rape, incest and genetic diseases. The Criminal Law regulates the mother's act of abortion and the doctor's surgical performance of abortion. The Mother and the Child Health Law prescribes the medical, ethical, and genetic grounds for the legal permission of abortion. Many people tend to abuse of abortion even though they are fully aware of its illegality. The law lead to be inconsistent with its enforcement. In this paper, I would like to suggest some proposals about the legal analysis of the Abortion Regulations to reform the existing regulations and increase the effectiveness of the regulations. A national survey was carried out using telephone interview with Korean citizens from August 1th to August 31th in 2005. A total of 1,025 citizens (male: female = 49.2%:50.8%) were randomly sampled in proportion to the number of population of 17 regions. The major findings of this survey were as follows. First, 91.4% of the respondents approved of abortion based on the medical grounds. Second 83.3% of the respondents perceived that abortion may be carried out based on ethical grounds for example rape. Third, 74.3% were agreed to abortion based on genetic diseases. Forth, 64.7% were approved the abortion that unmarried woman may be carried out. In contrast 45.0% were approved the abortion that girls may be carried out, whereas 46.4% were perceived that the abortion may not be permitted. Fifth, 58.3% were disagreed the permission of abortion based on social and economic grounds. According to the survey Korean citizens seem to have positive perception on the abortion that may be carried out based on medical, ethical and genetic grounds. Whereas they worried about the abortion based on social and economic grounds. Now the Mother and the Child Health Law prescribes the medical, ethical, and genetic grounds for the legal permission of abortion. But this law does not include social and economic grounds. In cases of when the mother has a impossibility to breed her child because of her social situations and financial conditions, we should accepted the legal acceptance of abortion due to social and economic grounds.

Under the present law, a medical corporation has the legalistic character of a noncommercial corporation and its commerciality is restricted by public service. In a recent precedent, however, a judgment has considered the service part in medical practice. The tendency of a precedent is that both commerciality of a medical institution and medical corporation are allowed to be pursued under fundamental order-observance. This change is found in china and india, which consider a medical service as national industry. In the case of ours, the now government demonstrate the industrialization or the market of medical service through promotion of commerciality of a medical corporation. This paper deal with the meaning of a medical corporation and the present condition of medical market under the present law and recommends a tendency of law policy through study of foreign's and our precedent for commerciality of medical advertisement and medical corporation.