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

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.15 no.1
• /
• pp.123-164
• /
• 2014

Under the new system of 'Separation of pharmaceutical prescription and dispensing' in Korea, which was implemented in 2000, physician could not dispense a medicine, and outpatient should have a physician's prescription filled at a drugstore. After pharmacist makes up outpatient's prescription, National Health Insurance Service(NHIS) pay for outpatient's medicine to pharmacist, except an outpatient's own medicine charge. And NHIS only pay for outpatient's prescription fee to physician and, physician doesn't derive profit from dispensing medicine in itself. Nevertheless, if physician writes out a prescription with violation of 'Criteria for the Medical Care Benefits', NHIS clawed back the payment of outpatient's prescription and medicine from the physician or the medical institution which the physician belongs to. In the past, NHIS's confiscation was in accordance with 'the National Health Care Insurance Act, Article 52, Clause 1'. But, since 2006 when the Supreme Court declared that there was no legal basis on the NHIS's confiscation of outpatient's medicine payment, NHIS had put in a claim for illegal prescriptions on the basis 'the Korean Civil law, Article 750(tort)'. So, Many medical institutions filed civil actions against NHIS. The key point of this actions was whether the issuing outpatient prescriptions with violations of Criteria for the Medical Care Benefits constitute of the law of tort. On this point, the first trial and the second trial took different position. Finally the Supreme Court acknowledged the constitution of the law of tort in 2013. In this paper, the author will review critically the decision of the Supreme Court, and consider the relativeness between the legal effect of Criteria for the Medical Care Benefits and the constitution of the issuing outpatient prescriptions with violations of Criteria for the Medical Care Benefits as the law of tort.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.12 no.2
• /
• pp.189-217
• /
• 2011

According to the current law of national health insurance, the Minister of Health and Welfare can impose a suspension of business or license, and a fine with medical institutions who violate the law. In case that medical institutions raise an action for ity with each penalty, they ask for replacing the suspension of business with a fine during the pendency of the action. But there is a long gap of time between an offense and administrative measures. One violation cause several types of administrative measures (suspension of business or fine, suspension of license etc.) and different government departments impose these penalties. It takes a lot of time to organize their opinions and they are liable to impose penalties after considerable space of time because of overwhelming tasks. Then the medical institutions can sustain a loss by getting unexpected administrative measures after their offense against the law. Thus, this article review whether extinctive prescription apply to the right of imposing fine on the law of national health insurance or not. Meanwhile, we have no regulations imposing a same fine to co-representatives of medical institution who infringe the law of national health insurance. On this point, this study review whether they have equal duty on that or not.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.17 no.1
• /
• pp.3-43
• /
• 2016

The North Korean medical laws are consisted of 'People's Health Act' and 'Medical Act' in the peak of the North Korean constitutional law. Before the legislation of 'People's Health Act', a number of medical laws and regulations existed. But, at present, there is no information about its amendment and effectiveness. 'People's Health Act' legislated in 1980 declared fundamental principles and policies of the North Korean health care system. 'Medical Act' legislated in 1997 is the basic law among the North Korean medical laws. It presented the goals and fundamental principles of the North Korean health care, and then regulated the basics about 'Tests and Diagnosis', 'Medical Treatment', and 'Medical Appraisal'. 'Medical Act' of North Korea was established later than South Korea, and its provisions is smaller in number. And there are lots of abstract and declaratory provisions compare with South Korean 'Medical Act'. Especially there is no provision about the kind and requirements of medical personnel and medical institutions, so it is hard to grasp the North Korean health care system at once. Regarding the medical treatment, there are many similar contents between the North and South Korean 'Medical Act'. But, the provisions, such as regarding mixing the new medicine and the korean traditional medicine, encouraging natural therapies in medical treatment, and informing the patient's protector of bad diagnostic result if there is concern to have a bad influence on patient, are different from the South Korean 'Medical Act'.

• 대한예방의학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 2001.10a
• /
• pp.361-362
• /
• 2001

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.7 no.2
• /
• pp.179-218
• /
• 2006

To succeed the claim of medical negligence, the plaintiff should establish the medical profession's fault, and the causation between the fault and damages. The faults are judged on lege artis, which is based on expert witness. However, judges often infer the faults and causations from circumstantial evidences and patients' injuries. This presumptions depend on the law of nature(Erfahrungsgesetz). The law of nature can explain the typical development of the event. If the circumstantial evidences were in accordance with that, the faults and causations would be able to be recognized by the judges. Therefore the standards of comparison such as lege artis or the law of nature play an important role for medical negligence liabilities to be imputed to doctors or hospitals. The factual elements necessary to assume the fault is similar to those of the causation, for the concept of the fault is correlated with that of the causation. The elements include the temporal and spatial proximity between damages and defendant's medical treatments, no existence of other causations, the probability of bed results developed by the medical treatments, and so on. These enable the fault and causation to be assumed at the same times.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.13 no.1
• /
• pp.295-329
• /
• 2012

A medical malpractice case requires special legal protection, considering its characteristics, such as seriousness and long term effects of its damages, medical information asymmetry between practitioners and patients, and difficulties in realization of liability. Taking the points above into consideration, Medical Malpractice Arbitration Act of 2012(MAA) has legislative intent to protect the rights of the injured from medical malpractice, while protecting the stability of medical practice by providing arbitration as an alternative dispute resolution. However, constitutional review is required for one new scheme of compensation for medical injuries during delivery, which is implemented in MAA of 2012, especially with regard to freedom to exercise occupation, property, equality under the Constitution. Two important aspects are 1. according to the law, absolute liability applies to compensation for damages during delivery without negligence of practitioners; and 2. the practitioner bears some portion of the cost, 30% in the law above. This article aims to analyze this new institution in various aspects of the Constitution, and, as a result, it does not comply with constitutional criteria.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.7 no.2
• /
• pp.271-310
• /
• 2006

In the situation of bringing out of social problem about the medical accident and medical dispute, from 1988 the enactment activity for a legislative bill on conciliation of dispute has promoted, a legislative bill on prevention and relief of medical accident was again proposed in December, 2005. This bill has been faced rough going in review process of National Assembly. Because the purpose of this legislative bill is the conciliation of interest of between medical service consumer and medical service supplier, an item of issues of law is no-fault compensation scheme. However, as no-fault compensation scheme runs counter to the principle liability with fault in our civil law, as expected, whether the inducement is valid or, if induced, the problem is not must be totally reviewed. First of all, the general of principle liability without fault and especially the medical system in foreign countries are reviewed, by reviewing an issue and the pros and cons of the inducement of no-fault compensation scheme, this article draws the conclusion. After all, considering that the necessity adapting Gefahrdungschftung in medical accident as much as other industrial fields exists, the many provisions of the principle liability without fault exists in civil law and special law of our law system, and no-fault compensation scheme let legislative purpose be, to what extent, achieved by conciliating patient and doctor, the inducement of principle liability without fault in medical field is reasonable in the aspect of politic and legal system.

• 대한예방의학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 2001.10a
• /
• pp.368-370
• /
• 2001

• 대한예방의학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 2001.10a
• /
• pp.371-372
• /
• 2001