• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.10 no.2
• /
• pp.85-113
• /
• 2009

In this paper, the Judgment 2007DA76290 of the Korean Supreme Court was analysed in two points of the legal theory and litigation. The judgment arouses some issues of medical malpractice liability. They includes the concept of the complications and permanent lesion and the difference between them, some problems in a judge's applying the requirements for the physician's tort liability to the medical malpractice situations, the theory of obligation de moyens related with the burden of proof of the negligent conduct for a physician's liability for misperformance of contract, the influence of a patient's physical conditions on the physician's liability, the breach of duty to disclose in selecting the safer one of the treatment methods bringing about the complications or leaving the permanent lesion and so on. In the situations of the case referred to above, the plaintiff should have tried to establish that a reasonable physician in the specific situation of the case would have substituted the safer method of treatment for the method in the case. If the plaintiff had succeeded in establishing it, he or she could have recovered even the physical harm resulting from the permanent lesion brought about by the complications of the specific treatment in the case. The plaintiff failed to do so and recovered only the emotional distress which the patient suffered owing to the physician's breach of the duty to disclose. Therefore the legal malpractice of the counsel might be found in this case.

• The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
• /
• v.11 no.2
• /
• pp.408-415
• /
• 2011

A lienor of the real estate Auction procedure does not associate with the lien report truth in an existing law system, and lienor can be opposed to vendee. Malicious lienor abuses such a principle of law and loses a sale price of the deferred purpose real estate in Auction procedure by convenience of lienor. In addition, there is apt to be a case to let I do debtor and collusion and false return, and the Secured credit swell out greatly. The necessity that liability does lien report to assure Secured credi becoming the formation truth and the undertaking of lien in Auction procedure is practically acute need. I showed the legislation idea which switched present situation investigation improvement and lien by the executive officer in legal mortgage in civil law In addition, it revised introduction and the Civil Execution Act of the lien registration system and solved Obligatory Report of the Lien about lien for a legislation.

• Journal of Cadastre & Land InformatiX
• /
• v.47 no.2
• /
• pp.61-78
• /
• 2017

When a boundary dispute occurs between landowners of adjoining lands, a court deals with a boundary violation on the basis of cadastral register. Boundary relocation surveying is one which reconstructs a boundary in cadastral register on actual land. Boundary relocation surveying includes most of surveyings related with the civil case such as restoration of land and demolition of building and a surveying result affects a ruling critically. However, boundary relocation surveying depends on surveying technician's knowledge and experiences and can lead to different surveying results. This study reviews legal principles of boundary relocation surveying by analyzing law practice of boundary relocation surveying which is used for solving a boundary dispute between landowners of adjoining lands and by examining related laws and Supreme Court precedents. The study seeks to contribute to consistent and reliable results of surveying by leading surveying technician to carry out a boundary relocation surveying on the basis of judicial doctrines.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.15 no.2
• /
• pp.227-251
• /
• 2014

In current law, the premium medical treatment system gives patients the right of choice between normal medical treatment service and premium medical treatment service. Only the doctors having a career more than a certain period of time fixed in the law are eligible for providing the premium medical treatment service. So, the premium medical treatment system is highly related to the patients' right to know and the right of self-determination. The system is also relevant to the so-called 'economic explanation' notion because patients should pay additional fee when they want to use this system. Meanwhile, the situation as follows is problematic as to this system. Although a patient applied for using the premium medical treatment system and the patient also chose his or her own doctor specifically, another doctor who was not selected as premium doctor could make a medical accident. Then, is the another doctor liable for damages because the accident was a medical malpractice or a breach of medical contract? In this study, we are going to examine the problems related with the premium medical treatment system. First, we examine the current law related to the system. Second, we look into the economic explanation duty and its application to the premium medical treatment system. Finally, we examine a real judgment case about a medical practice against the premium medical treatment system and we propose our solution to this case.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.34 no.1
• /
• pp.3-26
• /
• 2024

"Arbitration" is a procedure to settle a dispute over property rights or disputes based on non-property rights that the parties can resolve through a reconciliation, not by a judgment of a court, but by an award of an arbitrator, and is a kind of Alternative Dispute Resolution(ADR). Arbitration is the most representative and efficient ADR system in many fields, so by activating it, disputes can be resolved smoothly and ultimately, and social costs caused by a heavy increase in lawsuit can be reduced. Arbitration costs are often evaluated as 'cheap', but in reality, they can be similar to or exceed litigation costs. Nevertheless, unlike the Civil Procedure Act, which stipulates the litigation aid system for those who are hard to pay litigation costs, the Arbitration Act or the Arbitration Industry Promotion Act does not have the arbitration aid system for those who are hard to pay arbitration costs. However, considering ① the utility of arbitration compared to other dispute resolution procedures, such as litigation, ② the possibility of resolving trial delays through vitalizing arbitration, ③ the need to guarantee access to arbitration, ④ the feasibility of revitalizing arbitration by the arbitration aid system, it is necessary to introduce the Arbitration Aid System. To explain the details of the Arbitration Aid System, a person who intends to apply for arbitration or a party who continues arbitration could be the applicant. Regarding the judge, this paper suggests the establishment of a council for arbitration aid to prevent the possibility of prejudgment by the arbitral tribunal. Also, if the council accepts the application for arbitration aid, it would be appropriate for the arbitral tribunal to determine the allocation of arbitration costs considering the decision of the council and to include it into arbitral awards.

• 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.

• Journal of the Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture
• /
• v.48 no.4
• /
• pp.8-18
• /
• 2020

This study selected landscaping-related precedents among Supreme Court decisions to which the Basic Construction Industry Act and Civil Litigation Act were applied, and divided them by year, by sector type, and by litigation type according to the cause of the litigation, and examined time-series trends and the main characteristics of landscaping-related litigation. As a result of the analysis by year, it became apparent that litigation cases began to appear in earnest in 1977, similar to when landscape licenses were first issued. The types according to the cause of the litigation were analyzed by dividing them into 'planning', 'construction', and 'management'. Among them, 'planning' was the most frequently identified (409 cases). Various precedents were searched according to 'construction', and some of them were found to be due to unclear legal standards related to landscaping. In 'management', cases such as safety accidents and crimes were considered. The users, legal definitions, and purposes of the space served as the basis for judgments. As a result of analysis by case type, there were many administrative landscaping-related cases, and the proportion of criminal cases in the management type was the highest. The results of this study looked at precedents across the entire landscape industry, and it was significant that it provides basic data that could be used by the general public as that they were categorized by field. In the future, amendments to the law and various studies should be conducted to reduce and resolve disputes, and it is necessary to expand the publicity of precedents for this purpose.

• Journal of Ginseng Culture
• /
• v.5
• /
• pp.77-96
• /
• 2023

This study looks at the origin of a wild-ginseng, Korean ginseng, and traces the origin of associated wild-ginseng digging customs back to the Annals of the Joseon Dynasty. These historical customs helped Korea gain control over its wild ginseng resources following Japanese colonization acts, Korea's present-day forest laws, and Korean Civil Law. Prior to Japanese colonial rule in Korea (1910-1945), ginseng digging was a common custom, but Imperial Japan distorted Korea's own legal principles of the public rights of wild-ginseng digging during this colonial period. Distorted legal principles concerning digging customs continued after Korea's liberation from Japanese rule and were maintained until the enforcement of the Korean Civil Law in 1960, when legal principles of the right of common were changed to special servitude. The origin of the right of common can be found in the Sichojang of the Joseon Dynasty. The Sichojang, a place where local residents jointly collected firewood and fed livestock, was the minimum right to life and interest at the time. Since the right of common was the right to life, Imperial Japan attempted to abolish it, but it was never successful. In addition, distorted legal principles have been maintained in present-day forestry-related laws and regulations. Over 75 years since the liberation from Japanese rule in 1945, it is imperative to break away from the distorted legal principles and acknowledge that digging custom rights have changed from common customs to a special servitude under Korean Civil Law. Hence, an organization of wild-ginseng diggers is an unincorporated association, and their wild-ginseng digging customs can be constituted as a special servitude. Hence, their practices should be considered valid under customary law. Through this, it will be possible to clarify the legal nature and grounds for ginseng-related wild-ginseng digging activities, as well as the civil responsibility for the activities of wild-ginseng diggers.

• 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.

• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.13 no.3
• /
• pp.3-29
• /
• 2011

The Internet has become a medium through which people engage in increasingly sophisticated transactions. Businesses and consumers now use the Internet to communicate and engage in commercial transactions creating a virtual worldwide marketplace. They fear that the determination of Internet jurisdiction could be uncertain because electronic commerce is not executed in one particular place. Until now, there are no specific rules in the model laws and conventions dealing with international jurisdiction in electronic commerce. Due to the fact that U.S. companies are at the forefront of Internet technology, litigation regarding electronic commerce in the U.S. is more advanced than anywhere else in the world This paper analysis the basic framework for personal jurisdiction and approach for determining international jurisdiction in electronic commerce cases and explain the differences of several approaches involving interactions over the Internet. According to jurisdiction approach test, the U.S. employs sliding scale, effects and targeting test in electronic commerce. In recent many research views the targeting test as a global standard for determining international electronic commerce jurisdiction. However, there is still no clear indication of conclusive test of jurisdiction determination for electronic commerce. Therefore, it is a changing and process of jurisdiction test in the U.S. cases. In Korea, there is jurisdiction related clause in Private International Law, but it may be asked whether applicable in electronic commerce. Accordingly, analysis of the precedents changing related to electronic commerce jurisdiction of U.s. is full of suggestions in Korean companies, consumers and helps an enactment of code of civil procedure that containing many group's demands.