• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.17 no.2
• /
• pp.145-173
• /
• 2016

A patient's Right to Self-Determination or his/her Right of Autonomy in the Republic of Korea has traditionally been understood as being composed of two elements. The first, is the patient's Right to Know as it pertains to the physician's Duty to Report [the Medical Situation] to the patient; the second, is the patient's Right to Consent and Right of Refusal as it pertains to the physician's Duty to Inform [for Patient's Consent]. The legal and ethical positions pertaining to the patient's autonomous decision, particularly those in the interest of the patient's not wanting to know about his/her own body or medical condition, were therefore acknowledged as passively expressed entities borne from the patient's forfeiture of the Right to Know and Right to Consent, and exempting the physician from the Duty to Inform. The potential risk of adverse effects rising as a result of applying the Informed Consent Dogma to situations described above were only passively recognized, seen merely as a preclusion of the Informed Consent Dogma or a denial of liability on part of the physician. In short, the legal measures that guarantee a patient's 'Wish for Ignorance' are not currently being understood and acknowledged under the active positions of the patient's 'Right Not to Know' and the physician's 'Duty to Consideration' (such as the duty not to inform). Practical and theoretical issues arise absent the recognition of these active positions of the involved parties. The question of normative evaluation of cases where a sizable amount of harm has come up on the patient as a result of the physician explaining to or informing the patient of his/her medical condition despite the patient previously waiving the Right to Consent or exempting the physician from the Duty to Inform, is one that is yet to be addressed; that of ascertaining direct evidence/legal basis that can cement legality to situations where the physician foregoes the informing process under consideration that doing so may cause harm to the patient, is another. Therefore it is the position of this paper that the Right [Not to Know] and the Duty [to Consideration] play critical roles both in meeting the legal normative requirements pertaining to the enrichment of the patient's Right to Self-Determination and the prevention of adverse effects as it pertains to the provision of [unwanted] medical information.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.18 no.2
• /
• pp.105-138
• /
• 2017

This is case comments of several representative legal cases regarding self- determination right of patient. In a case in which an intoxicated patient attempted suicide refusing treatment, the Supreme Court ruled that the medical team's respect for the patient's decision was an act of malpractice, and that in particular medical situations (medical emergencies) the physician's duty to preserve life supersedes the patient's rights to autonomy. Afterwards, at the request of the patient's family, and considering the patient's condition (irrecoverable death stage, etc.) consistent with a persistent vegetative state, the Supreme Court deduced the patient's intention and decide to withdraw life-sustaining treatment. More recently, regarding patients who refuse blood transfusions or other necessary treatment due to religious beliefs, the Supreme Court established a standard of judgment that can be seen as conferring equal value to the physician's duty to respect patient autonomy and to preserve life. An empirical study of legal precedent with regard to cases in which the physician's duty to preserve life conflicts with the patient's autonomy, grounded in respect for human dignity, can reveal how the Court's perspective has reflected the role of the patient as a decision-making subject and ways of respecting autonomy in Korean society, and how the Court's stance has changed alongside changing societal beliefs. The Court has shifted from judging the right to life as the foremost value and prioritizing this over the patient's autonomy, to beginning to at least consider the patient's formally stated or deducible wishes when withholding or withdrawing treatment, and to considering exercises of self determination right based on religious belief or certain other justifications with informed refusal. This will have a substantial impact on medical community going forward, and provide implicit and explicit guidance for physicians who are practicing medicine within this environment.

• The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
• /
• v.11 no.7
• /
• pp.508-518
• /
• 2011

In various urban renewal projects related to real estate, developer in order to conduct the business, must get real estate inside project section directly or receive the consent for project from the owners. It must be carried out by consultation. When it fails, developer, in order to get ownership, adopts 'the Right of Claim for the sale' which has forcibleness. However, because the procedure for implementation of the right of claim for the sale is not clear, conflict between stakeholders is caused and it causes extension of period. Therefore, after examining judgments and references of judicial power for administrative litigation of the Right of Claim for the sale, by researching stakeholders of the housing rebuilding project and based on the results, finding out differences of stakeholders' recognition according to their position and problems of exercising procedure of the Right of Claim for the sale, and by presenting improvement plans of the system of the Right of Claim for the sale, contributing the success of the housing rebuilding project is the purpose of it.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.105
• /
• pp.75-94
• /
• 2008

In philosophy of mind, both reductionism and deflationism claim that the problem of mental causation is overstated, but the reason why they claim that way is quite different. On the one hand, for deflationism, since the problem of mental causation is bogus problem we need to focus on epistemology or scientific explanation rather than metaphysics. On the other hand, although the proponents of nonreductionism seem to think of the principles of causal closure of the physical and causal exclusion proposed by Jaegwon Kim as tenable, they do not go with the reductive approach to the problem of mental causation. Instead they stay with the concept of supervenience to overcome mental causation problem that, reductionists think, leads us to the dilemma situation. Of course, deflationists do not think that supervenience is plausible not as much as supervenience physicalists think that it is. If so, in what way and how do deflationists regard the problem of mental causation as a bogus problem? In this paper, I shall examine the most plausible response to mental causation problem, the contemporary version of mind-body problem by critically discussing and clarifying matters concerning the problem.

• Proceedings of the Plant Resources Society of Korea Conference
• /
• 2023.04a
• /
• pp.60-60
• /
• 2023

특허제도는 발명자에게 발명의 공개에 대한 대가로 일정기간 독점권을 인정하여 기술개발에 투자한 자금을 회수할 수 있는 기회를 제공하고 공개된 발명은 새로운 기술개발을 위하여 누구나 이용할 수 있도록 하여 기술발전을 촉진할 뿐만아니라 이미 개발된 발명에 대한 중복투자, 연구를 하는 낭비를 방지하기 위한 목적을 가진다. 본 조사는 2022년 12월 31일까지의 정부 특허정보넷인 키프리스(www.kipris.or.kr)에서 꽃차 관련 실용신안 특허 내용을 검색하여 정리하였으며 그 결과는 다음과 같았다. 1. 1983년 엘다베리꽃차 제조방법에 대한 것을 시작으로 최근 2022년 12월 31일까지 총 30개가 출원되어 2022년에는 증가된 것이 없었다. 2. 출원된 실용신안 특허 총 30개 중에서 소멸 2개(엘다베리/1983, 연꽃/2009), 취하 3개(무궁화/1992, 백화차/2005, 꽃차/2014), 거절 6개(매화/2001, 장미녹차/2007, 혼합꽃녹차/2007, 동결꽃차/2008, 소금꽃차/2015, 꽃차누룽지/2017), 공개 6개(꽃차/2014, 소금꽃차/2015, 꽃차추출물/2017, 기능성꽃차 /2018, 꽃차추출물/2018, 금잔화꽃차/2019), 포기 2개(개복숭아 꽃차/2015, 동백꽃차/2017), 등록(녹차꽃차/2006, 사과꽃차/2008, 목련꽃차/2012. 목련꽃차/2014, 칡꽃차/2015, 장미꽃차/2017, 모란꽃차/2017, 꽃차제조방법/2018, 꽃차로스팅장치/2018, 꽃음료/2020, 향 강화 꽃차/2021)은 11개였다. 3. 출원된 실용신안 특허 총 29개 중에서 개인이 출원한 것이 19개, 회사(아모레퍼시픽, 휴먼코스메틱, 화이통협동조합, (주)꽃다비, 주식회사 플러드, (주)우리꽃연구소)나 기관(한국식품연구원, 고창군), 대학(전남대, 동의대 2개)이 출원한 것이 11개였다.

• Proceedings of the Plant Resources Society of Korea Conference
• /
• 2021.04a
• /
• pp.61-61
• /
• 2021

특허제도는 발명자에게 발명의 공개에 대한 대가로 일정기간 독점권을 인정하여 기술개발에 투자한 자금을 회수할 수 있는 기회를 제공하고 공개된 발명은 새로운 기술개발을 위하여 누구나 이용할 수 있도록 하여 기술발전을 촉진할 뿐만아니라 이미 개발된 발명에 대한 중복투자, 연구를 하는 낭비를 방지하기 위한 목적을 가진다. 본 조사는 2020년 12월 31일까지의 정부 특허정보넷인 키프리스(www.kipris.or.kr)에서 꽃차 관련 실용신안 특허 내용을 검색하여 정리하였으며 그 결과는 다음과 같았다. 1. 1983년 엘다베리꽃차 제조방법에 대한 것을 시작으로 최근 2020년 12월 31일까지 총 29개가 출원되었다. 2. 출원된 실용신안 특허 총 29개 중에서 소멸 2개(엘다베리/1983, 연꽃/2009), 취하 3개(무궁화/1992, 백화차/2005, 꽃차/2014), 거절 6개(매화/2001, 장미녹차/2007, 혼합꽃녹차/2007, 동결꽃차/2008, 소금꽃차/2015, 꽃차누룽지/2017), 공개 6개(꽃차/2014, 소금꽃차/2015, 꽃차추출물/2017, 기능성꽃차/2018, 꽃차추출물/2018, 금잔화꽃차/2019), 포기 2개(개복숭아 꽃차/2015, 동백꽃차/2017), 등록(녹차꽃차/2006, 사과꽃차/2008, 목련꽃차/2012. 목련꽃차/2014, 칡꽃차/2015, 장미꽃차/2017, 모란꽃차/2017, 꽃차제조방법/2018, 꽃차로스팅장치/2018, 꽃음료/2020)은 10개였다. 3. 출원된 실용신안 특허 총 29개 중에서 개인이 출원한 것이 19개, 회사(아모레퍼시픽, 휴먼코스메틱, 화이통협동조합, (주)꽃다비, 주식회사 플러드)나 기관(한국식품연구원, 고창군), 대학(전남대학교, 동의대학교 2개)이 출원한 것이 10개였다.

• Proceedings of the Plant Resources Society of Korea Conference
• /
• 2020.08a
• /
• pp.106-106
• /
• 2020

특허제도는 발명자에게 발명의 공개에 대한 대가로 일정기간 독점권을 인정하여 기술개발에 투자한 자금을 회수할 수 있는 기회를 제공하고 공개된 발명은 새로운 기술개발을 위하여 누구나 이용할 수 있도록 하여 기술발전을 촉진할 뿐만아니라 이미 개발된 발명에 대한 중복투자, 연구를 하는 낭비를 방지하기 위한 목적을 가진다. 본 조사는 2019년 12월 31일에 정부의 특허정보넷인 키프리스(www.kipris.or.kr)에서 꽃차 관련 실용 신안 특허 내용을 검색하여 정리한 결과는 다음과 같았다. 1. 1983년 엘다베리꽃차 제조방법에 대한 것을 시작으로 최근 2019년 12월 31일까지 총 28개가 출원되었다. 2. 출원된 실용신안 특허 총 28개 중에서 소멸 2개(엘다베리/1983, 연꽃/2009), 취하 3개(무궁화/1992, 백화차/2005, 꽃차/2014), 거절 6개(매화/2001, 장미녹차/2007, 혼합꽃녹차/2007, 동결꽃차/2008, 소금꽃차/2015, 꽃차누룽지/2017), 공개 6개(꽃차/2014, 소금꽃차/2015, 꽃차추출물/2017, 기능성꽃차/2018, 꽃차추출물/2018, 금잔화꽃차/2019), 포기 2개(개복숭아 꽃차/2015, 동백꽃차/2017), 등록(녹차꽃차/2006, 사과꽃차/2008, 목련꽃차/2012. 목련꽃차/2014, 칡꽃차/2015, 장미꽃차/2017, 모란꽃차/2017, 꽃차제조방법/2018, 꽃차로스팅장치/2018)은 9개였다. 3. 출원된 실용신안 특허 총 28개 중에서 개인이 출원한 것이 19개, 회사(아모레퍼시픽, 휴먼코스메틱, 화이통협동조합, (주)꽃다비)나 기관(한국식품연구원, 고창군), 대학(전남대학교, 동의대학교 2개)이 출원한 것이 9개였다.