• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.9 no.2
• /
• pp.311-338
• /
• 2008

This paper aims to introduce an overview of the regime of expert witness in the medical malpractice litigation, and to provide a plan of how to make it improved. In regard with medical expert witness, several problems, such as time-consuming procedure, non-neural and unclear opinion without reasons provided, have been pointed out for several years. Lack of skill of the court and plaintiff/defender to question the expert is one of many cause to lead to the above problems. What is questioned to the expert? Because expert witness is used in determining probability of negligence, questions to the expert should be selected on the grounds of whether or not to obtain opinions or facts sufficient to let the judge infer negligence in view of the theory of proof burden established by the Supreme Court. In addition, to avoid non-neutral and unclear opinion, it is necessary to question the expert clearly, specifically and scientifically.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.12 no.2
• /
• pp.219-263
• /
• 2011

"Wrongful conception" is a medical malpractice claim in which the plaintiff is the parent of a normal, healthy infant whose conception was unplanned and unwanted. Medical malpractice in wrongful conception can be the result of a failure to provide informed consent to a patient, failure to properly perform a surgery, or a physician's negligent handling of a patient's problems. In the concrete, wrongful conception cases fall into two categories; those involving pre-conception negligence, such as a failed contraceptive, sterilization or failing of the controlling of embryo-number on the IVF, and those involving post-conception negligence, such as a failure to diagnose a pregnancy or to perform an abortion procedure. In addition, Medical malpractice can be the result of a failure to provide informed consent to a patient. When bad results occur by medical malpractice or failure to provide informed consent to a patient, the range of recovery of damages is decided by a traditional civil liability law. However the calculation of damages for wrongful conception is not easy because the high value of life is included in that case. So many courts opinions in foreign country and Seoul High Court decision in 1996 allow damages for the pregnancy, birthing process and sterilization costs, but refuses to allow damages for child rearing expenses. As to the range of recovery of damages for wrongful conception, one approach says that to allow damages in a suit such as this would mean that the physician would have to pay for the fun, joy and affection which plaintiff will have in the rearing and educating of the plaintiff's baby. To allow such damages would be against the dignity of the baby based on article 10 of the Constitution. However another approach says that damages are recoverable for all expenses related to child birth as well as for child rearing costs. Because the damages that the parents should bear a burden to the tort damage done is not a baby itself but child rearing costs. In other words, although the baby is healthy or not, economic burden of the parents can not be disregard. And denial of compensation for costs of child rearing may invalidate the role of liability law, grant the physician with a exemption certificate of liability. As a result, the medical field of procreation can be easily isolated from a liability of reparation. Therefore, on the liability law like the other medical malpractice action, parents who became pregnant or gave a birth by physician, wrongfully performed sterilization operation, etc. should be compensated for all damages relevant to unplanned and unwanted conception or birth as well as costs of child rearing.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.22 no.2
• /
• pp.49-79
• /
• 2021

Due to defendant's wrongful act by implant surgery, plaintiff has been suffered serious damages to his face and teeth, and pain caused by establishing implanted teeth. Jeonju Appellate Court sentenced to pay future medical expenses and alimony to the plaintiff in compensation for breach of duty or torts. The ruling is designed to relieve the burden of proof because it is extremely difficult for non-experts to determine whether dentists violated their 'duty of care' or whether there was a causal relationship between damages to medial treatment. It was judged that if symptoms that contributed to the patient's significant outcome occurred during or after surgery, such symptoms could be presumed to have been caused by medical negligence if indirect facts were proven to be other than medical negligence. Originally, the shifting of burden of proof in Germany, has already been developed in medical malpractice case since 1940s. In order to guarantee the patients' right, §630h German Civil Code (BGB) - presumption of negligence in the realization of controllable risk- has been also legislated. BGH (Bundesgerichtshof) has been interested in ensuring that the principle of equality between patients and doctors. So, in this study, we wanted to refer to German precedent cases to analyzing Korean medical malpractice lawsuit. In particular, the decision could be significant in that it approaches closer to allows the shifting burden of proof in drastically growing dental malpractice cases. This is clearly confirmed in the judgment of the dentist's "fault" that "if indirect facts about the symptom or occurrence are proven to be cause other than medical negligence, such symptoms can be presumed to be due to medical negligence."

• Archives of Plastic Surgery
• /
• v.43 no.3
• /
• pp.278-283
• /
• 2016

Background Disputes regarding medical malpractice occur between practitioners and patients. As patients have become increasingly aware regarding medical care, an increase in the unexpected side effects of procedures has been observed, thereby leading to an increase in disputes regarding medical malpractice. In this study, we reviewed trends in precedents involving cosmetic surgery-related medical disputes, with the goal of helping to prevent unnecessary disputes in the future. Methods We conducted a search of the judgments made in South Korean courts between 2000 and 2013 that were related to the field of plastic surgery. A total of 54 judgments were analyzed, and the selected precedents were reviewed and classified according to the kind of negligence involved. Results The claim amounts ranged from under 8 million KRW (6,991 USD) to 750 million KRW (629,995 USD). The most common ratio of the judgment amount to the claim amount was 20%-30%. The judgments were classified according to the following categories: violation of the duty of explanation in 17 cases (29%), violation of the duty of care in 10 cases (17%), violation of both duties in 20 cases (35%), and no violation of duty in six cases (10%). Conclusions Cosmetic surgery-related suits require different approaches than general malpractice suits. The Supreme Court requires plastic surgeons to determine the type, timing, methods, and scope of their treatments when considering possible results. Therefore, practitioners should be educated on their rights and responsibilities to enable them to cope with any possible medical dispute that may arise.

• Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
• /
• v.61 no.4
• /
• pp.474-477
• /
• 2018

Objective : From November 30, 2016, the Korean Government carried the revised Medical Dispute Mediation and Arbitration Act into effect. Mediation will start automatically without agreements of the defendant, when the outcome of the patient was death, coma more than a month or severe disability. Cerebral aneurysm has a definite risk of bad outcome, especially in the worst condition. Any surgical intervention to this lesion has its own high risk of complications. Recently, Seoul central district court decided 50% responsibility of the doctors who made a rupture of the aneurysm during coiling (2015Ga-Dan5243104). We reviewed judicial precedents related to cerebral aneurysms in lawsuit using a web search. Methods : We searched judicial precedents at a web search of the Supreme Court, using the key words, "cerebral aneurysm". Results : There were 15 precedents, six from the Supreme Court, seven from the High Court, and two from district courts. Seven precedents were related to the causation analysis, such as work-relationship. Five precedents were malpractice suits related bad results or complications. Remaining three precedents were related to the insurance payment. In five malpractice precedents, two precedents of the Supreme Court reversed former two precedents of the High Court. Conclusion : Judicial precedents on the cerebral aneurysm included not only malpractice suits, but also causation analysis or insurance payment. Attention to these subjects is needed. We also need education of the independent medical examination. To avoid medical disputes, shared decision making seems to be useful, especially in cases of high risk condition or procedures.

• Journal of dental hygiene science
• /
• v.8 no.1
• /
• pp.13-20
• /
• 2008

The purpose of this study was to find out experiences of dental hygienists working on dental care sites, to prevent potential malpractice accidents and disputes, and to examine why it is necessary to provide corresponding education or training courses. As a result, this study came to the following conclusions: 1. It was found that 32.5% had ever experienced in malpractice suits or disputes, and 55.0% of such experienced group had ever experienced in malpractice suits or disputes concerned with dental hygienists. 2. According to inquiry on whether dental hygienists have certain liability for malpractice disputes, it was found that 66.3% respondents ascribed the medical liability to dental hygienists. And according to inquiry for those respondents on liability ratio, it was found that 57.1% of them thought 11%~30% as appropriate liability ratio. 3. According to survey on extent of doubts about potential malpractice accidents and disputes in future, it was found that 72.4% respondents sometimes had doubts about them. 4. It was found that 64.2% respondents thought it necessary and urgent to provide education related to prevention and countermeasures for malpractice disputes.

• The Korean Journal of Emergency Medical Services
• /
• v.3 no.1
• /
• pp.91-101
• /
• 1999

The medicolegal problem can be occurred in all medical field. Especially pre-hospital stage can be more exposed to the legal claims due to the very nature of EMT business and characteristics of ER patient or their family member. All Emergency Medical Technician should be concerned about the law associated with emergency care for handling the medicolegal problem, so the legally risky situations that may be occurred in pre-hospital stage and ER practice. This study reviewed malpractice claim of emergency patients filed in at Association of malpractice patients' family and two tertiary level hospitals. Problems related to treatment and misdiagnosis. Especially issues concerning emergency medical service system including of inadequate transport, delay in triage and transport accounted for many cases of all claims. This alerts us to the seriousness of medical accidents of emergency patient. This paper suggests several items that all E.M.T and every member of ED health care team always have to remember the medicolegally risk situations, must be trained in understanding the patients' wants and desires and should have the knowledge of the law associated with emergency health care. Develop the system that can share the informations about the medicolegal events which were experienced by each ED health care institutes.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.7 no.1
• /
• pp.323-386
• /
• 2006

A combination of information technology and medical care has given rise to a new type of medicine, i.e., telemedicine. Broadly defined, telemedicine is the transfer of electronic medical data from one location to another. Both at home and abroad, telemedicine has come to success in establishing appropriate equipment and solutions for such non-conventional medicine. Sooner or later, telemedicine is believed to find itself as one of the universal treatments. In order to facilitate the full-fledged development of telemedicine, a number of legal and institutional problems have to be settled. In Korea, the Medical Act was amended to include such provisions as telemedicine, electronic medical records, electronic prescriptions, etc. and the Act came into force on March 31, 2002. Telemedicine is in common with the conventional medicine in that a physician treats a patient. However, telemedicine is basically differentiated in the followings: - The offer and acceptance of treatment and medication are usually made on-line; - Telemedicine is inherently dangerous because a physician cannot meet face-to-face with a patient; and - Joint and several liability is borne by all the physicians involved in a telemedical consultation. As a result, telemedicine is vulnerable in nature to medical malpractice. Accordingly, there must be some new theories and arguments in the formation of contract and torts. The discussion on the civil liability covers the above-mentioned issues, and would give an insight or guidelines in the concerted operation of provisions with respect to telemedicine. This study delves into the civil liability of physicians involved in telemedical consultations and treatments based upon the conventional malpractice theory.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.8 no.2
• /
• pp.195-204
• /
• 2007

It is a general principle that the plaintiff takes burden of proof about negligence and causation in a civil compensation litigation. And it is the same in a medical malpractice lawsuit. Korean courts have made diverse efforts to mitigate the plaintiff's duty to prove in medical malpractice lawsuits under the name of justice and impartiality. One of those theoretical attempt is 'presumption of causation'. The Supreme Court, since 1995, has developed a new logic for the theory of 'presumption of causation' which is characterized by a phrase "layman's common sense". The Court presumes the defendant's negligence and causation when the plaintiff alleges and proves the facts which can be pointed out and expressed by a layman with common sense. And if the defendant fails to prove that the result was caused by other fact than own medical activities, the defendant shall be defeated. I realize that this theory has problem for justice and impartiality. I would say that two fators should be considered and added to this logic. First,are defendant's acts generally belonging to gross negligence which would cause that kind of bad result? Second, is it recognized that there would be the causation generally and statistically between the cause and the result?

• The Journal of Korean Medicine Ophthalmology and Otolaryngology and Dermatology
• /
• v.25 no.3
• /
• pp.78-87
• /
• 2012

Objective : The purpose of this study is to describe the characteristics of medical malpractice related to pediatric ophthalmology and to identify the causes and potential preventability of medical litigation in Korean medicine. Methods : A study was performed by analysing 8 cases of lawsuit in the year between 1968 and 2011, which were selected among the medical dispute cases involving pediatric ophthalmology. Results : The eight closed claims occurring in the field of pediatric ophthalmology were founded in the data for medical malpractice. One claim was supreme court decision, two claims were high court decisions and five claims were district court decisions. Conclusions : While malpractice claims occurring in the field of pediatric ophthalmology were uncommon, they resulted in a high rate and amount of indemnity payments. For reduction of medical disputes, improvement of clinical trials and clinical medical cares is emphasized, and informed consent is also important.