• 치위협보
• /
• s.56
• /
• pp.1-8
• /
• 2002

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.16 no.2
• /
• pp.131-157
• /
• 2015

NHIS claimed for damages to doctors that by doing the treatment breaching medical insurance criteria caused by doctors, NHIS paid for medicine cost to pharmacy; as a result, the doctors caused the tort to NHIS. Following consecutive rulings afterwards, NHIS also argued that the medicine cost violating medical law or medical treatment expense paid to medical organizations are both the tort in civil law. NHIS claimed for all the damages, and the Supreme Court confirmed this judgment. However, within our national health insurance system, the subject of insurance payment is NHIS and the subject of medical treatment expense are also NHIS since the treatment expense is also insurance payment by asking the treatment to medical organizations. Further, national health insurance law is not made to control the violation of medical treatment cases; therefore, the breach of medical law cannot be covered by illegality of tort in civil law regarding NHIS. If that is the case, in the case that if the patients are treated according to treatment criteria via the doctors delegated the doctors' permission by Health and Welfare minister, NHIS acquired the benefits to remove the duty to give treatment payment to doctors in civil law; thus, even though the doctors have breached the medical law, NHIS does not have any damages. The fact that supreme court confirmed the ruling that the treatment is the tort in civil law towards NHIS is the judgment not counting the benefits of insurance payment as the subject but only considering the fact that NHIS paid to the doctors and this ruling have gone against the principle under civil code section 750. If the doctors have breached the medical law, the case should be sanctioned by medical law not national health insurance law, and the ruling of supreme court is assumed that they have confused both with the principle of national health insurance law and civil law.

• Journal of Oral Medicine and Pain
• /
• v.30 no.2
• /
• pp.215-230
• /
• 2005

The study was intended to investigate how dentists in private dental clinic thought on the present claim and review of dental insurance to reflect it in future establishing dental insurance policies. 1,465 dentists who were running own dental clinic in Pusan Metropolitan City and the south part of Kyungsang province were surveyed in February, 2004. A total of 406 copies of finished questionnaire were finally retrieved and analyzed. The findings are as follows. 1. About insurance claim affairs : Most of the subject of insurance claim was by dentist himself or dental hygienist(nurse). Agency claiming was carried under 20% of total insurance claim. 2. The degree of attendance on insurance lecture : The degree of attendance on insurance lecture was relatively low. 3. Filing a protest against insurance claim : Filing a protest against insurance claim was reavealed about half-and-half for "have been" or "have not been". 4. Private clinic dentist,s opinion about the regulations affecting review of dental insurance : Private clinic dentists opinion about current guide for insurance review of dental fee was“the guidance is difficult and unfair cutback of claim fee may be carried”. 5. The affairs about health insurance review agency : About 70% of private clinic dentists have dissatisfaction on health insurance review agency. 6. Standpoint of private clinic dentists about issuance of receipt for dental fee : About 70% of private clinic dentist have an difficulty in issuance of receipt for dental fee. 7. The affairs about change insurance noncoverage treatment to insurance coverage treatment : Most of private clinic dentists hoped that insurance coverage about full mouth scaling, pit and fissure sealant, fluoride application. But they do not hoped that insurance coverage about geriatric denture, prothodontic treatment except precious metal, photopolymerization resin treatment.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.16 no.2
• /
• pp.87-130
• /
• 2015

In a case in which National Health Insurance Corporation (NHIC) pays medical care expenses to a victim of a traffic accident resulting in injury or death and asks the assailant for compensation of its share in the medical care expenses, as the precedent treats the subrogation of a claim set by National Health Insurance Act the same as that set by Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act, it draws the range of its compensation from the range of deduction, according to the principle of deduction after offsetting and acknowledges the compensation of all medical care expenses borne by the NHIC, within the amount of compensation claimed by the victim. However, both the National Health Insurance Act and the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act are laws that regulate social insurance, but medical care expenses in the National Health Insurance Act have a character of 'an underinsurance that fixes the ratio of indemnification,' while insurance benefit on the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act has a character of full insurance, or focuses on helping the insured that suffered an industrial accident lead a life, approximate to that in the past, regardless of the amount of damages according to its character of social insurance. Therefore, there is no reason to treat the subrogation of a claim on the National Health Insurance Act the same as that on the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act. Since the insured loses the right of claim acquired by the insurer by subrogation in return for receiving a receipt, there is no benefit from receiving insurance in the range. Thus, in a suit in which the insured seeks compensation for damages from the assailant, there is no room for the application of the legal principle of offset of profits and losses, and the range of subrogation of a claim or the amount of deduction from compensation should be decided by the contract between the persons directly involved or a related law. Therefore, it is not reasonable that the precedent draws the range of the NHIC's compensation from the principle of deduction after offsetting. To interpret Clause 1, Article 58 of the National Health Insurance Act that sets the range of the NHIC's compensation uniformly and systematically in combination with Clause 2 of the same article that sets the range of exemption, if the compensation is made first, it is reasonable to fix the range of the NHIC's compensation by multiplying the medical care expenses paid by the ratio of the assailant's liability. This is contrasted with the range of the Korea Labor Welfare Corporation's compensation which covers the total amount of the claim of the insured within the insurance benefit paid in the interpretation of Clauses 1 and 2, Article 87 of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act. In the meantime, there are doubts about why the profit should be deducted from the amount of compensation claimed, though it is enough for the principle of deduction after offsetting that the precedent took as the premise in judging the range of the NHIC's compensation to deduct the profit made by the victim from the amount of damages, so as to achieve the goal of not attributing profit more than the amount of damage to a victim; whether it is reasonable to attribute all the profit made by the victim to the assailant, while the damages suffered by the victim are distributed fairly; and whether there is concrete validity in actual cases. Therefore, the legal principle of the precedent concerning the range of the NHIC's compensation and the legal principle of the precedent following the principle of deduction after offsetting should be reconsidered.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.18 no.2
• /
• pp.195-218
• /
• 2017

The increase in medical expenses for convalescent hospitals is increasing abnormally, which puts enormous burden on the National health insurance finances. This is a phenomenon that has been associated with the social phenomenon of rapid aging. The fact that the convalescent hospitals are paid the fixed amount per day for hospitalization became the incentive for some hospitals to use the patients as means of making money. And these hospitals intend to get regular care or take medicines at other hospitals in order to reduce medical expenses, even when the medical fee is paid. In order to prevent such financial leaks, the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service adjusted the patient group for inpatients in a hospital with the above behavior, and then cut the cost of medical care benefits. However, Above decision was canceled by the court on the grounds that there was no basis rule. However, based on the above case, I think that it can be an opportunity to draw up the problem and to improve of the Medical Fee System of hospital. The modified medical fee system can strengthen the medical function of the convalescent hospital. In addition, it seems reasonable to exclude admission for "physically disabled group". Even if admission is allowed for the physically disabled group due to social needs, it should be excluded from the National health insurance for the fianacial soundness and the sustainability of the system.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.21 no.1
• /
• pp.33-67
• /
• 2020

The hospitals that are owned by non-medical personnel result when non-medical personnel with resources conspire with newly graduated medical doctors who cannot afford the enormous amount of capital required at the beginning of the establishment of a medical institution. Such hospitals, though they may have met the external requirements as medical institutions, disrupt the medical market as it should be centered by medical personnels, In addition, such hospitals are causing a huge social problem as it is illegally receiving and reducing various benefits such as medical care benefits and subsidies from the government, resulting in a significant financial leak in the national health insurance. The illegality of the opening of a non-medical personnel hospital is so high that it nullifies the contractual arrangement for the establishment, imposes criminal penalties on all persons involved in the establishment under the Korean Medical Law, and imposes administrative sanctions on medical personnel. In case the hospital was aware of the illegality of its opening, but had applied to receive medical care benefits from the National Health Insurance Act and the Medical Care Act, such actions will result in the return of the benefits under the National Health Insurance Act and the Medical Care Assistance Act, subject to the penalty for the crime of fraud, and aggravated punishment for specific economic crimes based on the amount of gain, as well as civil liability for torts. In this study, we will examine the current status of the regulations on the non-medical personnel hospital and present the basis for future legislative directions by looking at the legal regulations and the attitude of the precedents.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.17 no.1
• /
• pp.299-346
• /
• 2016

There were also various decisions made in medical area in 2015. In the case that an inmate in a sanatorium was injured due to the reason which can be attributable to the sanatorium and the social welfare foundation that operates the sanatorium request treatment of the patient, the court set the standard of fixation of a party in medical contract. In the case that the family of the patient who was declared brain dead required withdrawal of meaningless life sustaining treatment but the hospital rejected and continued the treatment, the court made a decision regarding chargeable fee for such treatment. When it comes to the eye brightening operation which received measure of suspension from the Ministry of Health and Welfare for the first time in February, 2011, because of uncertainty of its safety, the court did not accept the illegality of such operation itself, however, ordered compensation of the whole damage based on the violation of liability for explanation, which is the omission of explanation about the fact that the cost-effectiveness is not sure as it is still in clinical test stage. There were numerous cases that courts actively acknowledged malpractices; in the cases of paresis syndrome after back surgery, quite a few malpractices during the surgery were acknowledged by the court and in the case of nosocomial infection, hospital's negligence to cause such nosocomial infection was acknowledged by the court. There was a decision which acknowledged malpractice by distinguishing the duty of installation of emergency equipment according to the Emergency Medical Service Act and duty of emergency measure in emergency situations, and a decision which acknowledged negligence of a hospital if the hospital did not take appropriate measures, although it was a very rare disease. In connection with the scope of compensation for damage, there were decisions which comply with substantive truth such as; a court applied different labor ability loss rate as the labor ability loss rate decreased after result of reappraisal of physical ability in appeal compared to the one in the first trial, and a court acknowledged lower labor ability loss rate than the result of appraisal of physical ability considering the condition of a patient, etc. In the event of any damage caused by malpractice, in regard to whether there is a limitation on liability in fee charge after such medical malpractice, the court rejected the hospital's claim for setoff saying that if the hospital only continued treatments to cure the patient or prevent aggravation of disease, the hospital cannot charge Medical bills to the patient. In regard to the provision of the Medical Law that prohibit medical advertisement which was not reviewed preliminarily and punish the violation of such, a decision of unconstitutionality was made as it is a precensorship by an administrative agency as the deliberative bodies such as Korean Medical Association, etc. cannot be denied to be considered as administrative bodies. When it comes to the issue whether PRP treatment, which is commonly performed clinically, should be considered as legally determined uninsured treatment, the court made it clear that legally determined uninsured treatment should not be decided by theoretical possibility or actual implementation but should be acknowledged its medical safety and effectiveness and included in medical care or legally determined uninsured treatment. Moreover, court acknowledged the illegality of investigation method or process in the administrative litigation regarding evaluation of suitability of sanatorium, however, denied the compensation liability or restitution of unjust enrichment of the Health Insurance Review & Assessment Service and the National Health Insurance Corporation as the evaluation agents did not cause such violation intentionally or negligently. We hope there will be more decisions which are closer to substantive truth through clear legal principles in respect of variously arisen issues in the future.

• Journal of Nutrition and Health
• /
• v.49 no.3
• /
• pp.189-200
• /
• 2016

Purpose: This study analyzed job importance, job performance, and job satisfaction in 38 dietitians working at geriatric hospitals and elderly healthcare facilities in Jeju surveyed from September 15-24, 2014 with the aim of providing basic data for improving the quality of meals and nutrition management for elderly patients. Methods: Data were analyzed using descriptive analysis, ${\chi}^2$-test, t-test, ANOVA, and Pearson's correlation coefficients using the SPSS Win program (version 12.0). Results: Regarding job importance, the average score was 4.29 (out of 5), indicating that hygiene and safety management scored the highest at 4.77 (out of 5), and nutrition management scored the lowest at3.86. In terms of job performance of subjects, the average score was 2.87 (out of 5), indicating that cooking operation management scored the highest at 4.42 (out of 5). Regarding the Importance-Performance Analysis (IPA) of job importance and job performance, hygiene and safety management and cooking operation management scored high for importance and performance (B quadrant) menu management, human resource management, and nutrition management scored low for importance and performance (C quadrant) and purchasing management and financial management were included inD quadrant and A quadrant, respectively. For the level of job satisfaction of subjects, the average score was 3.37 (out of 5), indicating that relationships with colleagues scored the highest at 3.72, and improving professionalism scored the lowest at 2.95. Additionally, job importance and performance of subjects were positively correlated withjob satisfaction (r = 0.395, r = 0.386, both p < 0.05). Conclusion: In conclusion, scores for job importance and job performance of nutrition management were low, and job satisfaction of improving professionalism scored low. Therefore, continuous training and education programs of nutrition management should be provided to improve professionalism of dietitians at geriatric hospitals and elderly healthcare facilities.

• Health Policy and Management
• /
• v.34 no.1
• /
• pp.78-86
• /
• 2024

Background: The purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness of the specialty hospital system by comparing the medical use of inpatients who had artificial joint replacement surgery in specialty hospitals and non-specialty hospitals. Methods: This study utilized 2021-2022 healthcare benefit claims data provided by the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service. The dependent variable is inpatient medical use which is measured in terms of charges per case and length of stay. The independent variable was whether the hospital was designated as a specialty hospital, and the control variables were patient-level variables (age, gender, insurer type, surgery type, and Charlson comorbidity index) and medical institution-level variables (establishment type, classification, location, number of orthopedic surgeons, and number of nurses). Results: The results of the multiple regression analysis between charges per case and whether a hospital is designated as a specialty hospital showed a statistically significant negative relationship between charges per case and whether a hospital is designated as a specialty hospital. This suggests a significant low in charges per case when a hospital is designated as a specialty hospital compared to a non-specialty hospital, indicating that there is a difference in medical use outcomes between specialty hospitals and non-specialty hospitals inpatients. Conclusion: The practical implications of this study are as follows. First, the criteria for designating specialty hospitals should be alleviated. In our study, the results show that specialty hospitals have significantly lower per-case costs than non-specialty hospitals. Despite the cost-effectiveness of specialty hospitals, the high barriers to be designated for specialty hospitals have gathered the specialty hospitals in metropolitan and major cities. To address the regional imbalance of specialty hospitals, it is believed that ease the criteria for designating specialty hospitals in non-metropolitan areas, such as introducing "semi-specialty hospitals (tentative name)," will lead to a reduction in health disparities between regions and reduce medical costs. Second, it is necessary to determine the appropriateness of the size of hospitals' medical staff. The study found that the number of orthopedic surgeons and nurses varied in charges per case. Therefore, it is believed that appropriately allocating hospital medical staff can maximize the cost-effectiveness of medical services and ultimately reduce medical costs.