• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.10 no.1
• /
• pp.39-75
• /
• 2009

The development of the biomedical science and technology has extended an argument about a status in constitutional law of unborn human life and a protection of the potential human life to that of an embryo and a gamete beyond a fetus. This argument has been focused on whether we should provide unborn or potential human life with human dignity and the right to life that are guaranteed by the constitutional law altogether or separately. If the right to life is given to unborn or potential human life, on what grounds can we restrict this right. Those who argue for the unity of the right to life with human dignity and the inseparability of those two claims that the right to life in itself should be guaranteed absolutely. According to the constitutional law, however, any constitutional right of the human person within the protection of essential part of the right can be compared with each other and restricted with some valid reasons from the legal perspective. This measure is unavoidable in reality because one right can come into conflict with another right frequently. Since fetus and embryo are in a process of developing into the human person, it is difficult to think that they are the same with the human person. For that reason, it is hard to consider that the right to life of fetus or embryo is the same with that of the human person. However, since a fetus has a special status as a potential human person, and an embryo also has a special value as a potential fetus upon an implantation, the right to life of fetus or embryo should be judged differently according to the stage of their development. A study on a constitutional status and protection of a fetus and an embryo is essential because unborn or potential human life is the origin of human person. Therefore, we have to make much account of their right to life and seek the legal respect for their inherent value.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.13 no.2
• /
• pp.285-308
• /
• 2012

The Korean supreme court said that Mrs Kim who was in a persistent vegetative state had a right to die if she had a presumed will or assumption of dying against Severance hospital in 2009. Presumed would be vague and can not be subjective to conjecture though, the court had a developed trial on the case. I recommend the higher valued notion such as the 'right to decide on the life extension' is more logical than assumptive will. To achieve this recommendation, I will search right to life, right to decision, human dignity and find the good relationship between them. In conclusion, I will announce that if PVS patients without advanced directives aren't able to express their will and no one could not assume their right to die in spite of meaningless life extension. So only the due and strict procedure about the extinction of meaningless PVS patients will allow them to sacrifice themselves or remove life extension ventilators. Also active euthanasia would be possible under the strict procedure of making advanced directives and the act of helping active euthanasia additionally, the crime of abetting suicide would not be executed in the legal scope.

• Journal of Korean Medical classics
• /
• v.26 no.4
• /
• pp.253-266
• /
• 2013

Objective : There was no attempt to understand Moving Energy between two kidneys(腎間動氣) and Kidney on Left & Life Gate on Right(左腎右命門) by integration progress. So I have faced to study based on two parts with concerning as clues. One is 'Life Right (左 右)' and the other is 'Between(間)'. Methods : Revealing the source of the origin, Nanjingbenyi(難經本義) is given on the basis. Take a close look at publications related to Nanjing(難經) which is about Kidney on Left & Life Gate on Right and Moving Energy between two kidneys. Take a close look at Kidney, the Life Gate and Moving Energy between two kidneys. Look see the three-dimensional uplift movement of Gi(氣). Results : In Neijing(內經) and Nanjing, the basic point of view for Kidney is the same. That is explained in line with attributes of convergence(收斂). 'Life Gate(命門)' is a term to express the divergence feature(發散機能) of kidney. Moving Energy between two kidneys is used to mean the mainspring of human body activity. The Gi in human body loses altitude turning left(左旋而下降) and gains height turning right(右旋而上升). Conclusion : Watching on functional aspect, there are two names for kidney. One is 'Kidney(腎)' which collects the losing altitude turning left and the other is 'Life Gate' which rises turning right. Moreover, the fundamental power that effectuate the uplift movement is Moving Energy between two kidneys. This kind model is a way that can be understood syntagmatically the Kidney on Left & Life Gate on Right and the Moving Energy between two kidneys without any gainsaying the original of Nanjing.

• Journal of Veterinary Clinics
• /
• v.28 no.1
• /
• pp.133-138
• /
• 2011

A 4-year-old female Fox Terrier dog (weighting 8 kg) with history of severe abdominal distention and anorexia was presented to Veterinary Teaching Hospital, Gyeongsang National University. In physical examination, grade 4/6 systolic murmur heard at the left heart base. Electrocardiography showed right ventricular enlargement (right axis deviation and deep S wave) and right atrial enlargement (P pulmonale). Diagnostic imaging studies revealed hypertrophy of right ventricle, enlargement of right atrium and tricuspid regurgitation and turbulence in the pulmonary artery in right parastenal short axis view. Based on the diagnostic findings, the dog was diagnosed as a case of valvular pulmonic stenosis.

• Korean Journal of Social Welfare
• /
• v.60 no.4
• /
• pp.157-173
• /
• 2008

Cultural welfare is the cultural activity provided and supported by state, a local autonomous entity, and private organizations to improve the quality of people's life. And as a basic concept as well as a premise of discussion on cultural welfare, cultural right is a social right, a right which can make cultural express, gain access to cultural activities. A statue concerning cultural activities contributed to the promotion of our people's cultural welfare interwoven with cultural right. But laws were made for the purpose of enforcing national policy and supporting regime rather than promoting fundamental human rights, and they became effective and were understood as a mere part of national government, not as perspective of their execution, security of right or realization of them. On the other hand, based on laws concerning social welfare, cultural life means human life consisting of minimum welfare system, and minimum level of life which guarantees least cultural life is becoming an objective standard. This means the standard level of cultural right, and for the handicapped cultural rights are concretely guaranteed as a right in that they will not be discriminated for their approaching to cultural activities. However, laws concerning cultural activities have limitation in that there are ambiguous concept and limitation of cultural life, and there are no concrete and active laws about cultural rights to guarantee cultural life. In a constitution and laws concerning social welfare, cultural welfare must have concrete contents about the range and the level of cultural rights. In order cultural rights to be turned into complete ones which can assert its rights, as seen in the Supreme Court, a court has to try to understand the violation of cultural rights as the violation of legal rights.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.9 no.1
• /
• pp.413-459
• /
• 2008

The Law has intervened to define rare circumstances in which a person should choose continuing life in United States. On the one hand, the law has traditionally acted to preservelife and to respect the sanctity of life. On the other hand, one's control over one's own body, and the right to determine what kind of medical care one will receive, is equally well respected and historically grounded. The competent patients have the right to forgo life-sustaining treatment, courts in United States have left many unanswered questions about the nature of that right. The right to choose to forgo life-sustaining treatment is a manifestation of a patient's autonomy interest. In United States, The Karen Quilan case gave rise to legislative activity in the host of state capitals, and several states had adopted statutes that formally recognized some forms of written directives describing some circumstances in which certain kinds of medical care could be terminated. These statues were sometimes dominated 'living will' acts, sometimes 'right to die' acts and ocasionally 'natural death' acts. Today virtually every state has produced a living will statue. In Korea, courts do not permit a terminally ill person to withhold or withdraw life-sustaining treatment. Living wills apply in case of terminal illness owing to a defect in legislation. Now In Korea, these lively dispute of legal policy on the preconditions and concrete procedure of living will act and natural death act. Through the legislation of living will act and natural death act, we should prepare some circumstances to respect patient's autonomy on the right to die. We should frame the cultural standard to make a decision of forgoing life-sustainin1g treatment under the discreet procedure.

• Journal of Contemporary Eastern Asia
• /
• v.19 no.2
• /
• pp.104-124
• /
• 2020

This paper investigates whether white-collar masculinity can play a role in the life of a far-right activist. The current study employs the methods of psychosocial analysis devised by Wendy Hollway and Tony Jefferson. Using the case of a Japanese far-right activist, it explores how the hegemony and decline of "salaryman masculinity" in Japan interacted with his life. It draws attention to the suffering of white-collar men in their struggle to comply with hegemonic masculinity. These men's suffering tends to be overlooked due to their stable socio-economic status, but it can potentially play a role in their investment in far-right discourse.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.10 no.1
• /
• pp.11-38
• /
• 2009

"Bioethics" may have various meanings depending on its roles. It may mean professional ethics for scientists and physicians, etc. It may also mean an academic discipline using interdisciplinary approach as well as a philosophical or a legal approach. "Bioethics" as an interdisciplinary study should often deal with public policy on bioethical issues. I call this role bioethics as a study of bioethics policy, which has to be developed as a new discipline. From this perspective, I deal with bioethical issues relevant to a human life before birth. There are various and often conflicting arguments about the moral status of a human life before birth such as the fertilization argument, the argument of genetic identity, so-called the "14 days" argument focusing on the formation of primitive streak, the argument of sentient being, and Michael Sandle's argument of an embryo as a being between a thing and a person. I argue that each of them is reasonable. Thus we are faced with reasonable disagreement on the views over whether a human life before birth has the same right to life as that of a person or whether right to life may be considered to be a matter of degree. If we acknowledge reasonable disagreement, as John Rawls pointed out, we should tolerate the views from ours in a plural society. Therefore, we cannot help making a policy that allows abortion and embryonic research with some limitations. When we say a certain act is morally permissible, "moral permissibility" does not mean that the act is morally right for all. Rather it means that the act cannot help being morally allowed for some persons although the others do not believe its moral rightness because they cannot right now rationally persuade others to accept their view.

• Journal of the Daesoon Academy of Sciences
• /
• v.43
• /
• pp.67-102
• /
• 2022

The purpose of this study is to analyze the human rights found in the North Korean Constitution and their core problem by focusing on elements of human rights suggested by Daesoon Jinrihoe's doctrine of Haewon-sangsaeng (解冤相生 the Resolution of Grievances for Mutual Beneficence). Haewon-sangsaeng is seemingly the only natural law that could resolve human resentment lingering from the Mutual Contention of the Former World while leading humans work for the betterment of one another. Haewon-sangsaeng, as a natural law, includes the right to life, the right to autonomous decision-making, and duty to act according to human dignity (physical freedom, the freedom of conscience, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of press, etc.), the right to equal treatment in one's social environment, and the right to ensure the highest level of health through treatment. The North Korean Constitution does not have a character as an institutional device to guarantee natural human rights, the fundamental principle of the Constitution, and stipulates the right of revolutionary warriors to defend dictators and dictatorships. The right to life is specified so that an individual's life belongs to the life of the group according to their socio-political theory of life. Rights to freedom are stipulated to prioritize group interests over individual interests in accordance with the principle of collectivism. The right to equality and the right to health justify discrimination through class discrimination. The right to life provided to North Koreans is not guaranteed due to the death penalty system found within the North Korean Criminal Code and the Criminal Code Supplementary Provisions. The North Korean regime deprives North Koreans of their right to die with dignity through public executions. The North Korean regime places due process under the direction of the Korea Worker's Party, recognizes religion as superstition or opium, and the Korea Worker's Party acknowledge the freedoms of bodily autonomy, religion, media, or press. North Koreans are classified according to their status, and their rights to equality are not guaranteed because they are forced to live a pre-modern lifestyle according to the patriarchal order. In addition, health rights are not guaranteed due biased availability selection and accessibility in the medical field as well as the frequent shortages of free treatments.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.15 no.2
• /
• pp.3-29
• /
• 2014

The Supreme Court made a decision that the doctor cannot be punished for not taking a blood transfusion to the patient, depending on the patient's will to refuse the blood transfusion on June 24, 2014. The reason is that, in a special situation of conflict between the right of patients to self-determination and the duty of care, and when it was impossible to compare whether which has the superior value, if the doctor made a medical practice to respect either of those two values according to the professional sense, he cannot be punished. In principle, the doctor should make medical practices according to the patient's will. However, if the patient's life was at stake, I think, the doctor is obliged to try his best to save the life of patient. Yet to entrust the patient's life to the doctors professional sense, is to give up the obligation of the country to protect lives. In this regard, I think that the Supreme Court Decision should be reviewed, and that an ongoing research is needed.