• Archives of Plastic Surgery
• /
• v.44 no.4
• /
• pp.283-292
• /
• 2017

Background Settlements between doctors and patients provide a solution to complicated disputes. However, some disputes may be renewed as a result of negligence by both parties. The purpose of this study was to review the legal issues that may potentially arise during the preparation of settlement agreements and to propose a list of requirements for ensuring the effectiveness of these settlement agreements. Methods Data from 287 civil cases concerning aesthetic surgery that took place between 2000 and 2015 were collected from a court database in South Korea. Factors that influenced the effectiveness of settlement agreements were analyzed. Results Among the 287 court precedents, there were 68 cases of covenant not to sue. Eighteen cases were dismissed because the settlement agreements were recognized as effective, and 50 cases were sent forward for judgment on their merits because the agreements were not recognized as effective. The types of surgery and types of complications were classified by frequency. We evaluated the geographical distribution of the precedents, the settlement timing, and the effectiveness and economic impact of the settlements. We found that there was no statistically significant relationship among these factors. Four major factors that made a settlement agreement legally effective were identified, and the data showed that fee-free reoperations were not considered by the court in determining the compensation amount. Conclusions When preparing a settlement agreement, it is advisable to review the contents of the agreement rather than to take the preparation of a settlement agreement per se to be legally meaningful.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.21 no.1
• /
• pp.153-185
• /
• 2020

In principle, even if serious consequences such as death or serious injury of a patient occur as a result of a medical accident, if the medical malpractice of a health care worker is not recognized, the health care worker is not held liable for said consequences. However, with the opening of the Korea Medical Dispute Mediation and Arbitration Agency on April 7, 2012, a system was established to compensate health care personnel for their medical malpractices only in the case of "injuries caused by medical accidents in the course of childbirth" (hereinafter referred to as "program for compensation of medical accidents"). Article 46 paragraph 1 of the current Medical Dispute Mediation Act, which is the basis of the Force Majeure Medical Accident Compensation System, stipulates that "medical accidents under delivery" claims are to be determined by the Medical Accident Compensation Review Committee are subject to the compensation project. And the details of the compensation, ratio of sharing financial resources for compensation, scope of compensation, and the guidelines and procedure for the payment of compensations are prescribed by Presidential Decree. In other words, the Presidential Decree requires the state to pay 70 percent of the compensation funds, and 30 percent of the above funds among health care providers. The Constitutional Court has decided on the 2015Hun-Ga13 that the scope of the health care institution's founders and the share of the compensation funds cannot be directly determined by the law, and that the portion delegated by the Presidential decree does not violate the Principle of Legal Protection nor Comprehensive Nondelegation Doctrine. However, this can be seen as an exclusion of accountability for force-induced delivery accidents even if there is no negligence of the medical staff. If the nature of the system is a type of social security system with a social compensatory nature, it could consider eliminating the health care innovator's cost-sharing provisions, leaving the full cost to the state. However, it is also necessary to review institutional protocols that strengthen the efforts of medical institutions in areas such as analysis of the causes of medical accidents and measures to prevent their recurrence. In addition, I think that the conclusion of the Act is in line with the purpose of the Comprehensive Wage Support Regulations that at minimum the law sets an upper limit of the compensation funds that are to be paid by health and medical institutions. Moreover, it is reasonable for the Medical Accident Compensation Review Committee to specify gestational age and weight of births, which are the criteria for compensation, under the Enforcement Decree of the Medical Dispute Mediation Act, in relation to the criteria for payment of contributions by the Medical Accident Compensation Review Committee, and to set the detailed criteria.

• Proceedings of the Korean Institute Of Construction Engineering and Management
• /
• autumn
• /
• pp.300-305
• /
• 2002

The construction project is a complex undertaking involving multiple participants. Conflicts are inherently natural in the construction projects and subsequently, a success of projects mainly depends on how well to cope with the conflicts. In the past, courts usually took the position that the professional's exposure in damages for negligent performance of any of his/her duties would not extend to strangers to the contractual arrangement. However, courts today generally reject that rationale which was earlier in vogue and protect architects, engineers, and contractors from being liable to third parties. It means that the lack of privity of contract could rarely protect a profession in a suit alleging the negligence or professional malpractice in preparing plans or specifications. The main goal of this paper is to enhance the understanding of the legal aspect of privity and to provide the trend of no-privity disputes through the analysis of lawsuit cases during the last 40 years. On the base of the analysis, importance of the third relationship and the liability in construction disputes is presented.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.20 no.1
• /
• pp.243-279
• /
• 2019

During the main ruling in 2018, it is difficult to find a new judiciary, which is understood to be due to a certain degree of jurisprudence established and focusing mainly on contentious disputes within the framework of damages. The cases in which the court's judgment is reversed helped to understand the reason and the judiciary, and it was confirmed that the dispute in the medical lawsuit became more and more intense. Decisions on responsibility restrictions and medical records were also noticeable, with a significant increase in the number of verdicts relating to the doubt about medical records. This is considered to be part of the increasing number of cases in which the parties raise questions about medical records, and several cases were categorized and introduced at this opportunity. We also introduce the case of forced discharge of long-term hospitalized patients and medical fee bill, because it was judicial interest after the Supreme Court ruling that the cost of treatment for the after-effects of medical malpractice can not be claimed to the patient.