• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.15 no.1
• /
• pp.59-80
• /
• 2014

The Medical Affairs Law regulates that Medical Doctor and Korean Medical Doctor(KMD) can practice in the boundary of each licence. But there is no clear provision to explain what practice in the boundary of MD's permitted region and what is KMD's. Moreover practice over the boundary of licence could be punished as a violation of the Law. KMD's use of medical devices have been objects of legal conflicts in the field. Because there is no clear provision in the Law, judical precedents have played the role as practical and final regulations. In this study, analyses on some judical precedents could show some rationales whether an issued KMD's use of medical devices is in the boundary of license. The courts considered the theories based on the practice, the level of required specialty and education, and the probability of danger to a patient. The judical precedents should be reviewed more precisely in the respects that it is adaptable in "the written law system"and it is desirable to divide boundaries between MD's and KMD's.

• The Journal of Internal Korean Medicine
• /
• v.40 no.4
• /
• pp.597-611
• /
• 2019

Objective: The goals of this study were to analyze each of the reasons adopted by the Constitutional Court or the Courts for Decisions determined to permit the use of medical devices by Korean medicine doctors and to look at the medical devices from a Korean medical perspective. Materials and Methods: For this study, several judicial precedent databases were used for searching judicial precedents that handle the usage of medical devices by Korean medicine doctors. Prior studies on similar issues were considered. The Korean medicine textbooks and related research studies were also used in this study. Results: From 2000 to 2018, a large number of lawsuits were filed regarding the legality of Korean medicine doctors using medical devices; approximately 20 final judgments or decisions were made. Among them, only two cases determined that Korean medicine doctors could legally use medical devices. Conclusion: The decisions in both cases could be interpreted as the judgments that Korean medicine doctors were allowed to use a medical device whose use or operating principles were commonly incorporated with Korean medical principles. That was provided that training was sufficient in the use of the medical device, to the extent that it could be used and that such use of the medical device was not feared to pose a health hazard.