• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.15 no.2
• /
• pp.317-343
• /
• 2014

In order to account for whether a doctor should indemnify damages resulted from violation of duty of care, the fact that a doctor violated duty of care, that damages were incurred, and the link between violation of duty of care and damages incurred, respectively, should be verified. So even though a doctor violated duty of care to patients, he or she will not bear the responsibility to indemnify damages unless it is not verified. If a doctor's negligence in medical practices is assessed that obviously unfaithful medical practice far exceeds the limit of admission of a patient, it will not go against people's general perception of justice or law and order to constitute a medical malpractice itself as an illegal action that will require liabiliy for damage. However, when the limit of admission is set too low, a patient's benefit and expectation of proper medical treatment can be violated. In contrast, if the limit of admission is set high, it can leave too little room for doctors' discretion for treatments due to a bigger risk of indemnification for damages. Thus, a reasonable balance that can satisfy both benefit and expectation of patients and doctors' right to treatment is needed.

• Journal of the Korean Society of School Health
• /
• v.21 no.2
• /
• pp.107-117
• /
• 2008

Purpose: To investigate the utilization of medical care benefits of school personnel on duty in Seoul. Method: The subjects were 551 workers under Seoul Metropolitan Office of Education(male 301, female 250) who got medical care benefits from March 2000 to February 2005. To analyze the data, frequency, chi-square test, and t-test by SAS package 9.12 were used. Result: The results show that elementary school personnel got the highest ranking, 314(57.0%). Among subjects, 57.2% personnel got accident when they were working on their own duty, 21% during school events and 13.5% were during commutes. They got medical care from orthopedics 75.9%, neurosurgery 7.6%, dental 4%, and 8 male and 2 female died during these days. The most frequent diseases of males and female were fracture and joints related disease. The reason of most health problem was due to injury(92.3%). Conclusion: The results of this study suggest that the continuous health care services like regular health check for school personnel, or social safety network to prevent injury are needed.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.7 no.2
• /
• pp.9-74
• /
• 2006

Due to the awareness of their rights for medical liability and the advancement of legal principles, it becomes also not hard to find those who seek damages against hospitals, doctors and nurses for the suicide committed under the protection of psychiatric institute in Korea these days. Judgements on these kinds of cases are not enough yet, so that it may be too early to try to find principles used in these cases, however it is hardly wrong to read following things from above cases. That is, to gain the case, plaintiffs should show (1) there exists an obligation of "due care"(there is a special relation between patients and hospitals), (2) the duty is violated on the basis of the applicable standard of care, (3) whatever injures or damages are sustained are proximately caused by the breach of duty and (4) the plaintiff suffers compensable damages. To specific, whether a psychiatric institute was liable for wrong death or not depends upon the patients conditions, circumstances and the extent of the danger the patients poses to himself or herself; in short, the foreseeability of self-inflicted harm(the doctor should have or could reasonably have foreseen the patient's suicide and the doctor's negligence actually caused the suicide). In this context if a patient exhibit strong suicidal tendencies, constant observation should be required. Negligence has been found not exist, however, when a patient abruptly and unexpectedly dashes from an attendant and jumps out a window or otherwise attempts to injure himself or herself. And the standard of conduct that is required to meet the obligation of "due care" is based on what the "reasonable practitioner" would do in like circumstances. The standard is not one of excellence or superior practice; it only re quires that the physician exercise that degree of skill and care that would be expected of the average qualified practitioner practicing under like circumstances. Most of these principles have been established at cases of the U.S.A and Japan. In this article you can also find the legal organizations of medical liability and medical contacts on the suicide of patients who have psychiatric diseases under Korean negligence law.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.14 no.2
• /
• pp.281-313
• /
• 2013

A physician has to do his best for the better treatment of his patiensts. But, if a physician cannot remedy his patients because of the lack of hospital facilities, the lack of medical knowledge and etc., the physician must transfer his patients to another suitable hospital immediately. This is called the duty of interhospital transfer of patients. The necessity of interhospital transfer of patients is primarily ocurred in emergency medical care situations. The Supreme Court Decision 2010DO7070 delivered on April 29, 2010 is one of the important decisions related to the duty of interhospital transfer of patients. The Supreme Court ruled that there were the physician's medical malpractice and the causation between the physician's medical malpractice and the death of patient, as the physician has left the patient without due observations for 1 hour and 30 minutes after the caesarean operation inspite of mass bleeding during the operation, and has transferred the patient to another suitable hospital later. And the Supreme Court ruled that the transferring physician has to explain the situation of the patient in detail to the physician being transferred. I agree with the Supreme Court Decision. As decided by the Supreme Court, physicians will treat their patients more carefully and in case of necessity for transfer, physicians will transfer their patients with more caustion. However, the study for this issue should be continued hereafter because concrete standards are not given to lawers and physicians just by the Supreme Court Decisions itself.

• Journal of Korea Port Economic Association
• /
• v.22 no.2
• /
• pp.83-108
• /
• 2006

Regarding the ocean carrier's responsibility for damage indemnification, both his or her duty of care and reason of legal exemption have been considered important. The International Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules relating to Bills of Lading also provides that the ocean carrier indemnifies for the loss or damage of freight on the basis of the principle of liability with fault. In other words, the carrier assumes responsibility only for the loss or damage of freight which is under his or her control and whose safety must be carefully maintained by him or her. The carrier's duty of care which is required for freight safety in accordance with the convention is associated with two themes, seaworthiness of vessel and freight itself. To make ocean freight shipping effective necessities the seaworthiness of the ship that will conduct the shipping service under its responsibility. This will ultimately lead to making the service impressive to the shipper as freight owner. Thus the purpose of this study is to contribute to more reasonable shipping by the shipowner or the carrier who needs to ensure seaworthiness of vessel, and prevent unseaworthiness that may be incurred in accordance with freight characteristics. For the purpose, this paper reviewed the meaning of seaworthiness of vessel through a juridical approach to its causal relationship with ocean freight shipping.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.13
• /
• pp.469-492
• /
• 2000

"International Safety Management(ISM) Code" means the International Management Code for the Safe Operation of Ships and for Pollution Prevention as adopted by the Assembly, as may be amended by the International Maritime Organization. This Code have brought into force internationally since 1th July, 1998 by incorporated to the new Chapter Ⅸ in the SOLAS Convention. Accordingly those States which give effect to the SOLAS Convention will have to ensure that rules giving effect to the Code are introduced into their domestic legislation. The purpose of this Code is to provide an international standard for the safe management and operation of ships and for pollution prevention, by this to reduce the maritime casualty which could caused by neglect of person. To achieve this purpose the ISM Code specifies a number of broad 'safety management objectives' for owning or operation companies, and it requires that such companies should establish, implementing and maintain a written Safety Management System(SMS) covering a whole range of safety environmental and related matters. These requirements of the Code could effect on the carrier in some points such as duty of due diligence to care for cargo, due diligence to make the vessel seaworthy and burden of proof etc. In this respect, We should know that the ISM Code could effect on the carrier advantageously or disadvantageously subject to whether the carrier observed the requirement of the ISM Code. Although it does not add cause of liability or increase limitation of liability imposed to the carrier.

• Korean Journal of Health Education and Promotion
• /
• v.27 no.2
• /
• pp.37-48
• /
• 2010

Objectives: In health care setting, patient education and health promotion services are inexpensive and effective initiatives to change health behavior due to use medical service resources and personnel. This study performed to define the responsibilities and competencies of health education specialist in private health care setting. For our suggestion, we reviewed regulatory, recommendation, and programs related to health education and promotion in clinics and hospitals. Results and Conclusion: The health promoting hospital and health services in Europe and innovative hospitals of community health promotion in the U.S. were examples of approaches that supply target groups with health promotion services in health care setting. The National Commission for Health Education Credentialing has suggested the specified responsibilities and competencies of health education specialist in health care setting according to their general duty. Considering the recommendation of the NCHEC, our suggestion included: 1) the three kinds of job scope, 2) the major targets, 3) the specified responsibilities and competencies, and 4) the available health promotion programs in clinic and hospital setting. The suggestion will contribute to the development of job market for health education specialist and to the cooperation with community health resources in health promotion services and comprehensive health care.

• Korean Journal of Adult Nursing
• /
• v.29 no.1
• /
• pp.76-86
• /
• 2017

Purpose: The purpose of the study was to provide deep understanding of the reported experiences of families with their loved one in the intensive care unit (ICU), focusing on interactions with healthcare providers. Methods: The data were collected by individual interviews of eleven participants. The transcribed data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis to identify major themes and sub-themes that represented the experiences of families. Results: Five themes and 13 sub-themes emerged. "Captive of patients' delayed death: Fear and anxiety" describes psychological problems arising when the family member became critically ill enough to warrant being admitted to the ICU. "Families as the weak: Suppression and resistance" describes interpersonal difficulties arising due to lack of information and trust with healthcare providers. "Deprivation of authority and duty as families: Helplessness" illustrate situational barriers in attempting to protect and support family member. "Re-establishment of trust relationship with healthcare providers: Gratitude and appreciation" describes how they satisfied with themselves by regaining trust relationship. Lastly, "Acceptance of reality through direct care participation: Relief and peace" illustrates peace of mind by gaining sense of reality through active direct care participation. Conclusion: This study demonstrates the positive and negative experiences of families with ICU patients. The results will be useful in developing family-centered nursing interventions.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.11 no.1
• /
• pp.331-393
• /
• 2010

Psychiatrists who treat violent or potentially violent patients may be sue for failure to control aggressive outpatients and for the discharge of violent inpatients. Psychiatrists may be sued for failing to protect society from the violent acts of their patients if it was reasonable for the psychiatrists to have known or should have known about the patient's violent tendencies and if the psychiatrists could have done something that could have safeguarded in public. The courts of a number of jurisdictions have imposed a duty to protect the potential victims of a third party on persons or institutions with a special relationship to that party. In the landmark case of Tarasoff v Regents of University of California, the California Supreme Court held that the special relationship between a psychotherapist and a patient imposes on the therapist a duty to act reasonably to protect the foreseeable victims of the patient. Under Tarasoff, when a therapist has determined, or under applicable professional standards should determine, that a patient poses a serious threat of violence to another, he incurs an obligation to use reasonable care to protect the intended victim against such danger. In addition to a Tarasoff type of action based on a duty to warn or protect foreseeable victims of psychiatric outpatients, courts have also imposed liability on mental health care providers based on their custody of patients known to have violent propensities. The legal duty in such a case has been stated to be that where the course of treatment of a mental patient involves an exercise of "control" over him by a physician who knows or should know that the patient is likely to cause bodily harm to others, an independent duty arises from that relationship and falls on the physician to exercise that control with such reasonable care as to prevent harm to others at the hands of the patient. After going through a period of transition, from McIntosh, Thompson and Brady case, finally, the narrow rule of requiring a specific or foreseeable threat of violence against a specific or identifiable victim is the standard threshold or trigger element in the majority of states. Judgements on these kinds of cases are not enough yet in Korea, so that it may be too early to try find principles in these cases, however it is hardly wrong to read the same reasons of Tarasoff in the judgements of Korea district courts. To specific, whether a psychiatric institute was liable for violent behavior toward others depends upon the patients conditions, circumstances and the extent of the danger the patients poses to others; in short, the foreseeability of a specific or identifiable victim. In this context if a patient exhibit strong violent behavior toward others, constant observation should be required. Negligence has been found not exist, however, when a patient abruptly and unexpectedly attack others or unidentifiable victim. And the standard of conduct that is required to meet the obligation of "due care" is based on what the "reasonable practitioner" would do in like circumstances. The standard is not one of excellence or superior practice; it only requires that the physician exercise that degree of skill and care that would be expected of the average qualified practitioner practicing under like circumstances. All these principles have been established in cases of the U.S.A and Japan. In this article you can find the reasons which you can use for psychotherapist's liability for failure to protect third person in Korea as practitioner.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.23 no.4
• /
• pp.133-170
• /
• 2022

Supreme Court 2018Da228486, on July 29, 2021, ruled Article 750 of the Civil Act as the basis for liability for damages due to the violation of the supervisory duty of the responsible mental patient. This judgment recognizes that the legal guardian is liable for tort due to neglect of the responsibility of supervision under Article 750 of the Civil Act because the duty of protection bears the duty of supervision over the mental patient under the law. However, unlike the case of Article 755 Paragraph 1, which explicitly requires a legal obligation to supervise, Article 750 only stipulates general tort liability. Thus, to admit tort liability under Article 750, it is not necessary that the basis of the supervisory duty by the law. In this case, the supervisory duty may also be acknowledged according to customary law or sound reasoning. The duty of supervision of a legal guardian is not a general duty to prevent all consequences of the behavior of a mental patient but a duty within a reasonably limited scope. Therefore, the responsibility of the burden of care should be acknowledged only when the objective circumstances in which it is appropriate to hold the legal guardian for the acts of the mental patient are admitted. Under the Act on the improvement of mental health and the support for welfare services for mental patients, a legal guardian cannot even be granted the supervisory duty to prevent the mental patient from harming others.