• Journal of the Korea Convergence Society
• /
• v.11 no.12
• /
• pp.309-317
• /
• 2020

In the post-corona era, telemedicine is becoming more important. This is the case in which it is written, in terms of this study, and in relation to the relationship between the Koreans and the Korean government. In addition, the aim is to prepare effective measures and seek policy suggestions for expanding the introduction of domestic telemedicine in the future. Although Japan has insisted on the necessity of introducing telemedicine in the medical community, it has institutionalized it with a cautious attitude until the establishment of telemedicine. On the other hand, South Korea lacks clear provisions on medical fees for telemedicine and legal measures regarding the responsibility for medical malpractice. Therefore, a clear legal interpretation of the telemedicine subject is needed, and a strategic approach is prioritized, including guidelines and measures for the legal responsibilities and limitations of physicians and patients.

• Journal of radiological science and technology
• /
• v.30 no.2
• /
• pp.89-93
• /
• 2007

Contrast medium is a very useful tool for X-ray examinations. But contrast medium has some unavoidable adverse reactions. For those patients who have never received contrast medium before, it is impossible to predict whether they will suffer from certain kinds of adverse reactions. Thus, radiologists should use strategies to minimize adverse events and be prepared to promptly recognize and manage any reactions to the contrast media. If a radiologist commits medical malpractice, he will face civil responsibility. Medical malpractice means a tort or breach of contract that occurs in a medical setting. Medical malpractices happen, despite the efforts of hospital staff. Many courts have applied the traditional doctrine of respondeat superior in actions against organizations for injuries caused by their employees. It is a legal doctrine, which states that an employer is responsible for employee actions performed within the course of the employment. A hospital is an organization for health purposes. An organization may be convicted of an offense committed by an employee of the organization acting in its behalf and within the scope of his office or employment. Organizational liability involves a wide variety of legal issues, including tort liability, wrongful employment practices, personal injury, breach of fiduciary duty, and so on. Many executive directors of organizations are aware of their personal and organizational risks of exposure to legal liabilities. The employer must have the right to control the physical conduct of the employee and must consent to receive the employee's services, while expecting some benefits from the services offered. Therefore, legal liability can be imposed for improper selection, assignment, training, and supervision of employees. In conclusion, the hospital itself has organizational liability for adverse reactions to the contrast medium.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.18 no.1
• /
• pp.297-341
• /
• 2017

We searched out court rulings on medical affairs through court library search sites and specialized articles on medically relevant judgments sentenced in 2016. And we selected and analyzed the judgements of the court we considered important as follows. In relation to the medical civil judgements, (1) In the case of applying surgery for female infertility during cesarean section operation but it has not been done, we expressed the regret for the lack of judgment in the process of entering the medical contract, introducing the rights infringed and the scope of compensation, (2) We pointed out that the ruling on the medical malpractice estimation goes out of limit of negligence estimation doctrine, and that the court asked very high degree duty of the traditional Korean medicine doctors to cooperate with Western medicine doctors. (3) In the case of admitting hospital's 100% responsibility, we pointed out the court overlooked the uncertainty and good intention of the medical practice. (4) Additionally, We introduced the cases admitted the hospital's responsibility in the accident related to the psychiatric patients in closed ward. Relating to a medical criminal ruling, we analyzed the supreme court decision about whether the dentist's Botox injection on the patient's face is a medical practice within the scope of the license from the viewpoint whether it is within the possible range of the word. And, concerning decisions on healthcare administration, (1) we analyzed the case about when medical personnel operate multiple medical institutions, whether it is possible to get back medical care costs under the National Health Insurance Law, (2) We commented on the ruling regarding explanation obligation in terms of object, degree, subject of explanation as a prerequisite for permissible arbitrary uninsured benefits. Finally, we reviewed the decision of the Constitutional Court about the Article 24 of the Mental Health Law, which it had allowed for a mental patient to be hospitalized forcibly by the consent of two guardians and a diagnosis of a psychiatrist. Also we indicated the problems of the revised Mental Health Law.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.19 no.2
• /
• pp.139-171
• /
• 2018

The 「Act on Remedies for Injuries from Medical Malpractice and Mediation of Medical Disputes」(hereinafter referred to as 'the Act on Mediation of Medical Disputes') provides that the state should compensate the victims of medical accidents occurred irresistibly in childbirth despite that health and medical service personnel fulfilled their duty of care for their damage within the range of its budget(Article 46 of the Act on Mediation of Medical Disputes). Given that victims of medical accidents could expect demage recovery only through lawsuits thus far, this act can be said to be a groundbreaking act. However, However, as 30% of the costs for such medical accident compensation projects are borne by those who have records of childbirth among the founders of health and medical institutions (Article 21 of the Act on Mediation of Medical Disputes), there has been a question about whether doctors are held responsible despite that the accidents such as the deaths of mothers and newborn babies occurred irresistibly without doctors' fault. However, recently, the Constitutional Court ruled that 'the range of founders of health and medical institutions' and 'share ratios of finances for compensation' in Article 46 (3) of the Act on Mediation of Medical Disputes' related to the imposition of the share of costs are institutional (Constitutional Court ruling dated April 26, 2018, 2015Heonga13, hereinafter referred to as 'the ruling in the case'). Although the ruling in the case was made based on only the principle of statutory reservation and the principle of ban on comprehensive authorization, this paper added a practical judgment. This paper proved that the share of costs in this case has the nature of burden charges in pursuit of study and does not infringe on the property rights of the founders of health medical institutions even in light of the principle of proportionality because there is a legitimate reason for imposing the burden charge. The imposition of the share of costs in the system for compensation for medical accidents occurred irresistibly is against the principle of liability with fault in part. However, the medical accident compensation projects are rational a national policy for the victims of medical accidents and the medical world clearly gains some benefits from the effect to terminate medical disputes. The expansion of finances for compensation through the payments of the share of costs will reduce the suffering and misunderstanding of victims of medical accidents occurred in the process of childbirth and will be very helpful to the construction of stable treatment environments of medical workers by quickly establishing the medical accident compensation projects as such.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.20 no.1
• /
• pp.163-201
• /
• 2019

Doctor has the duty of an inter-hospital transfer, known as inter-facility or secondary transfer, when the diagnostic and therapeutic facilities required for a patient are not available at the given hospital. Also, the decision to transfer the patient to an another facility is rely on whether ill patient is the benefits of care, including clinical and non-clinical reasons, available at the another facility against the potential risks. Crucial point to note is that issues about 'inter-hospital transfer' is limited to questions occurred in the course of transfer between emergency medicals (facilities). 'emergency medical (facility)' is specified by Medical Law, article 3 and the duty of an inter-hospital transfer includes any possible adverse events, medical or technical, during the transfer. Because each medical facility has an different ability to care for a patient in an emergency condition, coordination between the referring and receiving hospitals' emergency medicals would be important to ensure prompt transfer to the definitive destination avoiding delay at an emergency. Simultaneously, transfer of documents about the transfer process, medical record and investigation reports are important materials for maintaining continuity of medical care. Although the duty of an inter-hospital transfer is recognized as one of duty of doctor and more often than not it occurs, there is constant legal conflict between a doctor and a patient related to the duty of the inter-hospital transfer. Therefore, we need clear and specific legal standard about the inter-hospital transfer. This paper attempts to review the Supreme Court's cases associated to the inter-hospital transfer and to compare opinion of the cases with guideline for an inter-hospital transfer already given. Furthermore, this article is intended to broaden our horizons of understanding the duty of an inter-hospital transfer and I wish this article helps to resolve the settlement and case dealt with the duty of inter-hospital transfer.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.20 no.1
• /
• pp.133-162
• /
• 2019

Due to the nature of medical malpractice lawsuits, it is difficult for medical consumers, who are weak in getting information when it comes to health care problem, to secure all information inside the hospital. Even if you are confident about the hospital infection, it is true that people have difficult to obtain medical testimony by expert. It is seen as no easy task to testify to the malpractice of colleagues who work in the same field not only in our country but also abroad, when a doctor gives negative testimony to another doctor in a medical malpractice lawsuit. Although few health care providers will be motivated to take medical care from the outset, testimony or statements from a medical practitioner can have a significant impact on the outcome of a lawsuit, as it is impossible for the patient to control or be aware of the whole process of medical conduct, especially in the event of a hospital infection and the victim. If the hospital can prove the causality of damages caused by negligence of the employees or supervision of the hospital itself in a medical suit caused by the infection, the level of protection of the victim could be raised further. We sought to find a solution to these problems by looking at the provisions of other laws related to hospital infection. In particular, as the comparative legal review regarding hospital infection, Germany's legislative precedent sets a medical contract as a typical civil law contract, so it is thought that looking at German civil law regulations also has implications for Korean law. We also tried to improve the French Special Act 'rights of patients' and we can look at the consequent changes in court cases. Finally, the content of the U.S. case's and the theory of 'the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur' in relation to it show that doctors and hospitals have been forced to shift the burden of proof through this theory. This paper tried to find out the implications of mitigating the burden of proof by reviewing various issues that might be related to medical litigation of hospital infection from a comparative point of view.