• The Korean Journal of Pain
• /
• v.29 no.1
• /
• pp.62-62
• /
• 2016

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.19 no.1
• /
• pp.143-163
• /
• 2018

Implant procedure belongs to so called a commercialized medical treatment, its procedure is simple and clear, and the possibility of success is almost 100%. In addition, it is a selective method rather than an inevitable method for a patient's health, so the importance of liability for explanation is especially emphasized for protection of autonomous decisions by patients. Considering these characteristics, the plaintiff in the relevant case said that the contract of implant procedure has the characteristic of subcontract, and only the failure of implant itself and the violation of liability for explanation should be the defendant's fault liability. In addition, although the above procedure contract is considered as delegation rather than subcontract, whether it's the defendant's malpractice should be judged by general people's common sense rather than average people in the industry. Therefore, if all the implanted teeth were removed due to bleeding and pains, and the patient suffered from dysaesthesia during the process, the defendant's malpractice is fully proved. When the judgements of implant medical malpractice were researched, the court doesn't consider implant contract as subcontract, but it judges dentist's malpractice by whether the implant itself is successful, so it seems that the court acknowledges similar characteristics with subcontract whose purpose is completion of work to some degree. In addition, considering the detailed contents of presented medical malpractices, it seems that judging medical malpractice is based on the common sense of general people. Therefore, the argument of the plaintiff is valid when the fact the adjustment amount is relevant to the amount that the plaintiff initially claimed is considered even though the relevant case was decided to be compulsory mediation.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.9 no.1
• /
• pp.57-127
• /
• 2008

In medical malpractice lawsuits, negligence is generally defined as conduct that is culpable because it falls short of what a reasonable person would do to protect another individual from a foreseeable risks of harm. Thus, the essence of negligence is a breach of obligations to be attentive, and the breach of obligations to be is negligence. However, whether negligence is or not depends on time, place, litigation forms and the judge since the meaning of negligence is wavering on the basis of abstract and normative judgment. In this thesis, what is medical negligence, a breach of obligations of attention for a doctor in medical malpractice lawsuits, would be it further enacted that doctors have the responsibility to protect the patients as a subordinate duty due to a principle of faith and sincerity besides the main duty for medical contract-performance since the suit is a litigation form to be based on responsibilities of experts, especially doctors, though having factors that are non-contractual as a trait for medical treatment. Further on the concept, when the plaintiff asserts and proves a specific fact from the recent moderation of the burden of proof about medical malpractices, whether the court should find a true bill in medical malpractice actually or not has been discussed.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.15 no.1
• /
• pp.83-122
• /
• 2014

Compared with medical cases and health care law from other countries there has been a lot of progress on medical law, especially on medical precedents in Korea. However, in recent years, medical precedents tend to reflect a realistic position of health care providers, rather than normative position of the victim. The burden of proof to prove strict liability is given to patients in civil law suits by courts, patients generally has the burden of proof. The rate of claims to prove the negligence of medical malpractice is falling significantly. Even if the error is acknowledged, it is not enough to get right to be relief for patients by increasing limitations of liability or ratio of patient's own negligence. Compensation fee is included in medical fees and risk of medical malpractice actions contributes ultimately to a health care consumer. In conclusion, author represents a major the new upgrade of above mentioned problem. By advising that court should assess actively for the perspective of victim for medical negligence we will be able to exercise remedies of patients' rights and to prevent recurring medical accidents and also contribute to medical advances.

• 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 Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.15 no.2
• /
• pp.195-223
• /
• 2014

Nurses are medical care providers most closely associated with the national health. Their works are subdivided and specialized, and it is such a factor making nurse's role more important, and with the appearance of specialized nurses, they have secured a position as an independent medical care provider. As the domain of nurse's service becomes broader, there are more accidents and disputes related to nurses. However, there are not many studies conducted on such problems, and even when medical disputes take place related to nurses, the court does not make consistent judgments as a matter of fact. Besides, as the ambiguity of nurse's range of service and the lack of nursing workforce work as a factor causing nurse's medical malpractice, more legal discussions and studies are required to seek proper solutions to such problems. Thus, as a plan to clarify legal issues likely to occur due to nurse's medical practice, this study classified nurse's work into medical assistance practice and other jobs based on their own independent judgments, and proposed establishing concrete regulations on the range of their work, while reviewing common problems extracted from precedents related nurse's medical malpractice. Moreover, while examining Japanese precedents related to the Act of Medical Service Personnel, Nurses and Midwives, which is the sole act of nurses in Japan, this study reviewed the necessity of revising the present nurse-related regulations in Medical Service Act, or enacting a sole act of nurses.

• 대한예방의학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 2000.10a
• /
• pp.195-196
• /
• 2000

• The Korean Journal of Pain
• /
• v.28 no.4
• /
• pp.254-264
• /
• 2015

Background: Pain medicine often requires medico-legal involvement, even though diagnosis and treatments have improved considerably. Multiple guidelines for pain physicians contain many recommendations regarding interventional treatment. Unfortunately, no definite treatment guidelines exist because there is no complete consensus among individual guidelines. Pain intervention procedures are widely practiced and highly associated with adverse events and complications. However, a comprehensive, systemic review of medical-dispute cases (MDCs) in Korea has not yet been reported. The purpose of this article is to analyze the frequency and type of medical dispute activity undertaken by pain specialists in Korea. Methods: Data on medical disputes cases were collected through the Korea Medical Association mutual aid and through a private medical malpractice liability insurance company. Data regarding the frequency and type of MDCs, along with brief case descriptions, were obtained. Results: Pain in the lumbar region made up a major proportion of MDCs and compensation costs. Infection, nerve injury, and diagnosis related cases were the most major contents of MDCs. Only a small proportion of cases involved patient death or unconsciousness, but compensation costs were the highest. Conclusions: More systemic guidelines and recommendations on interventional pain management are needed, especially those focused on medico-legal cases. Complications arising from pain management procedures and treatments may be avoided by physicians who have the required knowledge and expertise regarding anatomy and pain intervention procedures and know how to recognize procedural aberrations as soon as they occur.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.28 no.4
• /
• pp.43-59
• /
• 2018

This study aims to review various efforts required by medical institutions to prevent medical accidents in advance and to suggest the necessity of introducing liability insurance for medical accidents based on cases abroad and compulsory professional indemnity insurance at home. Over the past five years between 2013 and 2017, the number of inquiries regarding medical accidents and medical disputes has increased by 11.1 percent from 36,099 to 54,929, and the number of mediation and arbitration for medical disputes has increased by 14.3 percent from 1,304 to 2,225. Since some medical accidents even cause social problems, a compulsory insurance system for the liability of medical institutions for damages need to be introduced to promptly compensate the victims of medical accidents and to ensure compensation by medical personnel. In Korea, a system is in place to provide compensation for a client who suffers an accidental damage after receiving professional services, regardless of whether or not the professional service provider can provide compensation. In major foreign countries, a medical liability system is in place that is applied either by the principle of liability with fault, or the principle of liability without fault. In this study, the cases of compulsory insurance and semi-compulsory insurance in the US and Japan to which the principle of liability with fault is applied, as well as the case of New Zealand to which the principle of liability without fault is applied, were examined. It is necessary to urgently introduce the compulsory insurance system for the liability of compensation to prevent medical disputes and to compensate for the life and physical damages of the victims of medical accidents in domestic medical institutions. Doing so is expected to ensure fair compensation for the victims of medical malpractice and compensation by medical personnel, thereby improving medical practice.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.9 no.1
• /
• pp.9-56
• /
• 2008

The medical practice does not always get a satisfatory result since the disease progress of patients are depended on patients' physical constitution and the doctors cannot control the outcomes about patients' physiological and biological reaction after the treatment. Moreover, the medical practice may bring wrong result fatalistically because of the unpredictablility of life. To demand for compensation of the damage to the doctors about these wrong result, the patient side holds the burden of proof that is between medical practice and demage, and there is damage from doctor's malpractice according to the accepted theory about the fundamental principle of distribution of the burden of proof. This falls not only under the liability of Tort Law, but also liability of Contract Law. However, the patient may be in difficult situation to prove the malpractice of doctors since he or she cannot recognize the facts because he or she was in unconscious while the medical practice was conducted, or they cannot judge precisely even though they recognize the facts. Nevertheless, the lawsuits against medical malpractice are the field that never achieves the equality of arms since the most of the evidence belong to the doctor's side. Hence, to maintain the principle of the equality of arms under the constitution, the theory leads to alleviate the burden of proof that patients hold. However, the doctors cannot be asked for the burden of proof that they conduct medical practice without errors. Because the doctors may experience difficulty to prove their innocence as the patients because of the unique characteristic that medical practices have. Therefore, the methods of the alleviation of the patient's burden of proof should have the equality of arms and the equal opportunity between the patients and the doctors with the evaluation of the justifiable interest from both the patients and the doctors. As the methods of the alleviation of the burden of proof, the alleviation of the demands and the degree of the burden of proof or resolutely the conversion of the burden may be considered. However, Recognizing the exception from general principle with converting the burden of proof is not proper in principle because the doctors may experience difficulty of the proof as the patients may have. If the difficulty of proof can be resolved by alleviating of the demands and the degree of the burden of proof, it is more desirable resolution rather than converting the burden of proof.