• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.15 no.2
• /
• pp.31-60
• /
• 2014

In this paper the good Samaritan civil liability is argued. In many cases some damage could be caused by an emergency medical service. In such situations the degree of duty of care taken by the service provider would be alleviated depending upon the degree of emergency. Then the service provided by anyone not carrying any duty to do so could be generally ruled by the 'Korean Civil Act' Article 735. This article is related to the management of affairs in urgency. The application of this article means the mitigation of civil liability of the service provider. If the service provider not carrying any duty to provide it "has managed the affairs" of the service "in order to protect the" victim "against an imminent danger to the latter's life", the provider "shall not be liable for any damages caused thereby, unless he acted intentionally or with gross negligence". Korea has another rule applied in such a situation, that is the Korean 'Emergency Medical Service Act' Article 5-2. This article is established for the exemption from responsibility for well-intentioned emergency medical service. It could be referred to as the Good Samaritan law. It provides: "In cases where no intention or gross negligence is committed on the property damage and death or injury caused by giving any emergency medical service or first-aid treatment falling under any of the following subparagraphs to an emergency patient whose life is in jeopardy, the relevant actor shall not take the civil liability ${\cdots}$" In this paper the two articles is compared in the viewpoints of the requirements for and effects of the application of them respectively. The 'Korean Civil Act' Article 735 is relatively general rule against the the Korean 'Emergency Medical Service Act' Article 5-2 in the same circumstance. Therefore the former could be resorted to only if any situation could not satisfy the requisites for the application of the latter. In this paper it has suggested that the former article be more specific for the accuracy of making decision to apply it; and that the latter be revise in some requirements including the victim, the service provider, and the service.

• Korean Security Journal
• /
• no.14
• /
• pp.485-516
• /
• 2007

Jeju Special Self-Government Province adopted an autonomous police system for the first time since 60 years in Korean police. The purpose of autonomous police system is to offer a police service to be suitable in regional conditions. But Jeju autonomous police system for nearly one year after adoption is criticized to be established on the ground of political reason but not local decentralization. Actually Jeju autonomous police has not a clear cut jurisdiction and operation scope because of the jurisdiction duplication between national and autonomous police. The original task is confined on environment and sightseeing so on given to administration police for local self-government. So criminal investigation authority on general crimes is not to Jeuju autonomous police on account of special judicial police. First, it is the structural rationalization of Jeju autonomous police system. It speaks that Jeju provincial police bureau and police station have to be as national police institution, on the other hand, patrol district station and police box have to be as autonomous police institution. Of course, functional division has to be followed. National police performs managing all the assembly and demonstration by the management law on assembly and demonstration including the suppression against any large scale demonstration and disturbance, also the investigation on serious crimes just as international crimes and broaden area crimes including all the felony. Together national police performs the duty concerned to all the foreign affairs and national securities in along with the investigation on traffic accidents. On the other hand, autonomous police performs the function for citizen's life safety as crime prevention and the enforcement on the violation against police operation law, together the traffic management and the regulation on traffic violations. and the investigation on minor crime as simple violence or petty larceny including the management on local big events. Second, the budgetary of autonomous police is rationalized by the share of budgeting between Korean government and Jeju special self-government province. Third, urgent arrest authority on general crime and the rights of claims for the summary trial on minor crimes are given to autonomous police. Of course, this problem is resolved naturally in case of giving the investigation rights to autonomous police on minor crimes.