• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.16 no.2
• /
• pp.295-326
• /
• 2015

Under the revision of medical law on February 1, 2012, health care providers are banned from opening 2 or more medical institutions and being involved in managing the institutions. However, purpose of the legislation of the revised law is unclear and even confirmation of such purpose of the legislation based on the calculation of multiple legislative backgrounds cannot be appropriate means of achieving such purposes. This article confirms and reviews the development of revision of medical law and history of the principle of 'one person-one medical institution', and legislative purpose of the revised medical law as well as examines unconstitutionality of such revision based on limited fundamental rights by the revision, principle of clarity, and principle of the prohibition of excessive restriction.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.10 no.2
• /
• pp.427-453
• /
• 2009

This study aims to review legal problems of similar medical practice and suggest methods of improvement. Similar medical practice refers to all medical practices conducted in the state that human qualification is not fulfilled. It may cause serious damages on health and lives of national people. Currently, similar medical practices are recognized as unlicensed medical practices and prohibited based on the Medical law and additionally punished by then special law in Korea. However, the current Medical Law does not provide clear and accurate concept of medical practices so that it is difficult to regulate similar medical practices. The issue of complementary and alternative therapy related to similar medical practices is also in special state different from other countries. In addition, since similar medical practices lack of evidences in terms of safety, the dangerousness of accidents is high and it may affect badly on health of national people and health care policies. Methods of improvement in order to resolve problems regarding similar medical practices are: first, concept and scope of medical practice should be clear, accurate and concrete. Second, complementary and alternative therapies related to similar medical practices need to be strictly examined and the supervisory right should be given to doctors should be given even though a part of it is allowed. Third, research institutes specialized in the field should be established for scientific examination of complementary and alternative therapy and objective research results should be open to the public. Finally, since damage cases caused by similar medical practices by non-medical personnel, national management and supervision for similar medical practices should be reinforced.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.18 no.1
• /
• pp.3-35
• /
• 2017

The Supreme Court of Korea first admitted compensation for damages caused by breach of informed consent in 1979. From then on, specific details of informed consent are shaping up and developing through court precedents. The duty of informed consent of doctor is based on article 10 of the Constitution and medical contract, and is expressly prescribed Article 12 of Framework Act on Health and Medical Services and other acts and regulations. By the way, the regulations about duty of informed consent of doctor have been established in Medical Law revised on December 20, 2016, and the revised Medical Law will be implemented on June 21, 2017. According to the revised Medical Law, medical practices subject to description and consent are operation, blood transfusion and general anesthesia that threaten to cause serious harm to human life or to the body. When performing these medical activities, the written consent must be explained and agreed upon in advance. If a doctor violates the law, he will incur fines of less than 3 million won. Comparing and viewing the revised Medical Law and existing legal principles about the duty of informed consent, we can confirm that there is a substantial difference between the two parties. Accordingly, despite the implementation of the revised medical law, the existing legal principles are unlikely to be affected. However, from the perspective of legal uniformity and stability, it is undesirable that legal judgments on the same issues differ from each other. The revised Medical Law about informed consent needs to be reformed according to existing legal principles. And, as in the case of Germany, it is desirable to include the matters concerning informed consent in the civil code.

• 대한예방의학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 2001.10a
• /
• pp.357-358
• /
• 2001

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.16 no.2
• /
• pp.131-157
• /
• 2015

NHIS claimed for damages to doctors that by doing the treatment breaching medical insurance criteria caused by doctors, NHIS paid for medicine cost to pharmacy; as a result, the doctors caused the tort to NHIS. Following consecutive rulings afterwards, NHIS also argued that the medicine cost violating medical law or medical treatment expense paid to medical organizations are both the tort in civil law. NHIS claimed for all the damages, and the Supreme Court confirmed this judgment. However, within our national health insurance system, the subject of insurance payment is NHIS and the subject of medical treatment expense are also NHIS since the treatment expense is also insurance payment by asking the treatment to medical organizations. Further, national health insurance law is not made to control the violation of medical treatment cases; therefore, the breach of medical law cannot be covered by illegality of tort in civil law regarding NHIS. If that is the case, in the case that if the patients are treated according to treatment criteria via the doctors delegated the doctors' permission by Health and Welfare minister, NHIS acquired the benefits to remove the duty to give treatment payment to doctors in civil law; thus, even though the doctors have breached the medical law, NHIS does not have any damages. The fact that supreme court confirmed the ruling that the treatment is the tort in civil law towards NHIS is the judgment not counting the benefits of insurance payment as the subject but only considering the fact that NHIS paid to the doctors and this ruling have gone against the principle under civil code section 750. If the doctors have breached the medical law, the case should be sanctioned by medical law not national health insurance law, and the ruling of supreme court is assumed that they have confused both with the principle of national health insurance law and civil law.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.9 no.1
• /
• pp.385-411
• /
• 2008

The goal of medicine is to contribute to promoting national health by preventing diseases and providing treatment. The scope of modern medicine isn't merely confined to disease testing, treatment and prevention in accordance to that, and making experiments by using the human body is widespread. The advance in modern medicine has made a great contribution to valuing human dignity and actualizing a manly life, but there is a problem that has still nagged modern medicine: treatment and healing for terminal patients including cancer patients. In advanced countries, pain care and hospice medicine are already universal. Offering a helping hand for terminal patients to lead a less painful and more manly life from diverse angles instead of merely focusing on treatment is called the very hospice medicine. That is a comprehensive package of medical services to take care of death-facing terminal patients and their families with affection. That is providing physical, mental and social support for the patients to pass away in peace after living a dignified and decent life, and that is comforting their bereaved families. The National Hospice Organization of the United States provides terminal patients and their families with sustained hospital care and home care in a move to lend assistance to them. In our country, however, tertiary medical institutions simply provide medical care for terminal patients to extend their lives, and there are few institutional efforts to help them. Hospice medicine is offered mostly in our country by non- professionals including doctors, nurses, social workers, pastors or physical therapists. Terminal patients' needs cannot be satisfied in the same manner as those of other patients, and it's needed to take a different approach to their treatment as well. Nevertheless, the focus of medical care is still placed on treatment only, which should be taken seriously. Ministry for Health, Welfare & Family Affairs and Health Insurance Review & Assessment Service held a public hearing on May 21, 2008, on the cost of hospice care, quality control and demonstration project to gather extensive opinions from the academic community, experts and consumer groups to draw up plans about manpower supply, facilities and demonstration project, but the institutions are not going to work on hospice education, securement of facilities and relevant legislation. In 2002, Ministry for Health, Welfare & Family Affairs made an official announcement to introduce a hospice nurse system to nurture nurse specialists in this area. That ministry legislated for the qualifications of advanced nurse practitioner and a hospice nurse system(Article 24 and 2 in Enforcement Regulations for the Medical Law), but few specific plans are under way to carry out the regulations. It's well known that the medical law defines a nurse as a professional health care worker, and there is a move to draw a line between the responsibilities of doctors and those of nurses in association with medical errors. Specifically, the roles of professional hospice are increasingly expected to be accentuated in conjunction with treatment for terminal patients, and it seems that delving into possible problems with the job performance of nurses and coming up with workable countermeasures are what scholars of conscience should do in an effort to contribute to the development of medicine and the realization of a dignified and manly life.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.10 no.1
• /
• pp.171-211
• /
• 2009

Because Korea has the excellent informational technology, it was expected to be able to improve the accessibility to healthcare and compete with other nations in excellence through u-Healthcare. But we can't complete the excellent u-Healthcare because of the law to be able to use only the tele-counselling between doctor to doctor or doctor to nurse. First of all, we must complete the law to be able to use the improved u-Health containing of telemedicine between doctor to patient. Though other factors, the procurement of safe IT, the credibility to healthcare service provider containing of nutritionist and occupational therapist etc. are prepared for erecting u-Healthcare, we can get the final and decisive u-Health policy only by means of Law for supporting u-Healthcare's Activation. The important sections of Law for supporting u-Healthcare's Activation are as follows. Sec. 4 The Minister for Health, Welfare and Family Affairs and the dean of associated administrative division have to erect the combined plan for u-Healthcare's Activation. Sec. 11 Government and local autonomous entity can support the facility and equipment to be necessitated for using u-Healthcare to improve the medical accessibility of person in the region with poor medicine. Sec. 13 Doctor can support other doctor's medical action through IT and if there are not medical risk, doctor can give medical act directly to the special patients. Sec. 21 If pharmaceuticals is necessitated in u-Healthcare, remote doctor has to send the patient the electronic prescription and the pharmaceutist to receive the electronic prescription has to delivery the pharmaceuticals in accordance with patient's demand.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.9 no.2
• /
• pp.383-422
• /
• 2008

Considering above, It might be efficient that medical disputes would be settled by the intervention, the agreement, and the administrative relief that reflect mediators' opinion, who have rich social experience as well as specialized knowledge. Therefore, KCA needs to strengthen its function of mediation and improve relevant systems to become an effective settlement institution. And although Oriental medicine disputes have mainly given ex post facto explanations so far, administrative efforts such as policy development or legislation should be made for the high quality of Oriental medical services offered because an efficient way saving social or economic costs caused by the dispute would be precautionary measures. The traditional Oriental medicine is featured with the lack of baseline examination, the uncertainty of medical mistakes, the difficulty in clarifying and proving facts, the hardship of injury conformation and causality because of the characteristics of Oriental medicine, and the relative lightness of physical damages. Actually, there has been few legal settlements in Oriental medical disputes since the compensation, itself, compared to the lawsuit cost, is relatively much lower without practical benefits.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.9 no.1
• /
• pp.505-534
• /
• 2008

Aesthetic plastic surgery rarely has the lifesaving, the medical necessity, and the emergency, because it was executed in order to acquire personal satisfaction in the external features. In addition, aesthetic plastic surgery has the strong commerciality in that it is based on the attraction of a client through medical advertisement and the range of uninsurance. These characteristics cause whether aesthetic plastic surgery is included in medical procedure and the legal contract between physician and client is controversial issue. Also, attention and explanation in aesthetic plastic surgery are more emphasized than those in general medical procedure. According, this document presents the various characteristics of aesthetic plastic surgery, which differs from that of general medical procedure.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.11 no.1
• /
• pp.11-52
• /
• 2010

Medical Dispute Arbitration Law had been debated on its legislation several times since Korean Medical Association's submission of the bill to the National Assembly in 1988, eventually in December, 2009, passed the National Assembly Standing Committee and was laid before the Legislation and Judiciary Committee, and thus its legislation is now near at hand. During the long process, it has provided a hot issue with our society. And yet, Medical Dispute Arbitration Law has differed considerably in legislative content depending on the main body of proceeding the enactment, which subsequently was given the mixed comments of 'Act on Malpractice-related Damage Relief' or 'Medical Indemnity Act', and this legislative bill also cannot be free from this debate. It is desirable that medical disputes between doctors and patients be resolved through conciliation between the parties concerned. But, because reaching a compromise is difficult owing to deep emotional conflicts between the parties, difficulties in investigating a cause and requiring a high amount of settlement money, etc., it is inevitable to seek a resolution by third party intervention. By the way, such an arbitration by third party is based on the compromise of the interested parties and thus has a limitation of not being able to satisfy both parties completely. Therefore, the legislative bill made for arbitration of medical disputes between the parties will have to prepare an institutional system for the parties to easily understand and accept. Also, problems occurred in the legislative bill will have to be corrected through an in-depth discussion in order for the legislative bill to work as an effective system.