• Proceedings of the Korean Institute of Communication Sciences Conference
• /
• 1995.06a
• /
• pp.775-779
• /
• 1995

• Digital Contents
• /
• no.9 s.100
• /
• pp.36-43
• /
• 2001

명예에 관한 죄는 사람의 사회적 인격성을 침해하는 범죄로서 보호법익은 '명예'이다. 명예는 인간의 존엄성을 바탕으로 사람이 사회적, 윤리적, 정신적으로 당연히 누려야할 인격적 가치를 말한다. 이는 크게 외적명예, 내적명예, 명예감정으로 나눌 수 있는데, 외적명예는 사람의 인격가치에 대한 사회적 평가를 의미한다. 내적명예는 사람의 고유한 인격가치로서 사람이 출생과 함께 갖게 되는 윤리적 사회적인 인격적 가치제를 말한다. 명예감정은 자기의 인격가치에 대한 자신의 주관적 평가를 말한다.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.27 no.2
• /
• pp.143-166
• /
• 2012

This paper deals in depth with airline over-booking practices and legal questions therefrom in the light of public interests. Chapter I as an introduction gives clear ideas of what are the over-booking, fact-revealing current state of denied boarding and nature of the problems inherent but veiled in those practices. In Chapter II, it is reviewed whether legal instruments for DBC(Denied Boarding Compensation) are adequately equipped for airline passengers in R. O. K. Upon the results of the review that international law to which Korea is a party, domestic law and administrative preparedness for the DBC are either null or virtually ineffective, the Chapter by contrast illustrates how well the U. S. and the E. U. safeguard civil rights of their passengers from such an 'institutionalized fraud' as the over-booking. In Chapter III on which a main emphasis lies, it is examined whether the over-booking practice constitutes a criminal offense: Fraud. In section 1, the author identifies actus reus and mens rea required for fraud then compares those with every aspect of the over-booking. In conjunction with the structural element analysis, he reviews the Supreme Court's precedents that lead the section into a partial conclusion that the act of over-booking judicially constitutes a crime of fraud. Despite the fulfillment of drawing up an intended answer, the author furthers the topic in section 2 by arguing a dominant view from Korean academia taking opposite stance to the Supreme Court. The commentators assert, "To consummate a crime of fraud, there must be property damage of the victim." For this notion correlates with a debate on legally protected interest in criminalization of fraud, the section 2 shows an argument over 'Rechtgut' matters specific to fraud. The view claims that the Rechtgut comes down rather to 'right to property' than 'transactional integrity' or 'fair and equitable principles'. However, the section concludes that the later values shall be deemed as 'freedom in economic decision-making' which are the benefit and protection of the penal law about fraud. Section 3 demonstrates the self-contradiction of the view as it is proved by a conceptual analysis that the infringement on freedom in economic decision-making boils down to the 'property damage'. Such a notion is better grounded in section 4 by foreign court decisions and legislation in its favour. Therefore, this paper concludes that the airline's act of over-booking is very likely to constitute fraud in both theory and practice.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.20 no.3
• /
• pp.83-139
• /
• 2019

Recognition of liability for damages due to medical malpractice has been developed largely on the basis of two paths. First is the case where there is an error in a physician's medical practice and this infringes upon the legal interests of life and body, and the compensation for monetary and non-monetary damages incurred from such infringement on life and body becomes an issue. Second is the case where there is a breach of a physician's duty of explanation that results in a infringement on the patient's right of autonomous decision, and the compensation for non-monetary damages incurred from such infringement becomes an issue. However, even if there is a medical error, since it is difficult to prove the causation between the medical error of a physician and the infringement upon legal interests, the physician's responsibility for damage compensation is denied in some cases. Consider, for example, a case where a patient is already in the final stage of cancer and has a very low possibility of a complete recovery even if proper treatment is received from the physician. Here, it is not appropriate to refuse recognition of any damage compensation based on the reason that the possibility of the patient dying is very high even in the absence of a medical error. This is so because, at minimum, non-monetary damage such as psychological suffering is incurred due to the physician's medical error. In such a case, our courts recognize on an exceptional basis consolation money compensation for losing the chance to receive proper treatment. However, since the theoretical system has not been established in minutiae, what comes under the benefit and protection of the law is not clearly explicated. The recent discourse on compensating for damages incurred by patients, even when the causation between the physician's medical error and infringement upon the legal interests of life and body is denied, by establishing a new legal interest is based on the "legal principle of loss of opportunity for treatment." On what should be the substance of the new legal interest, treatment possibility argument, expectation infringement argument, considerable degree of survival possibility infringement argument and loss of opportunity for treatment argument are being put forth. It is reasonable to see the substance of this protected legal interest as "the benefit of receiving treatment appropriate to the medical standard" according to the loss of opportunity for treatment argument. The above benefit to the patient is a value inherent to human dignity that should not be infringed upon or obstructed by anyone, and at the same time, it is a basic desire regarding life and a benefit worthy of protection by law. In this regard, "the benefit of receiving treatment appropriate to the medical standard" can be made concrete as one of the general personal rights related to psychological legal interest.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.31 no.1
• /
• pp.37-62
• /
• 2016

Two controversial issues exist in interpretation of "Force Majeure" set forth in the Article 931 (4) of the Korean Commercial Code. Firstly, its scope of application is ambiguous. Secondly, there is a concern that the "immunity" under paragraph 1 and "Force Majeure" may overlap each other. "Force Majeure" refers an event resulted from either natural disaster or 3rd-party. Meanwhile, the latter implies relatively extensive and comprehensive meaning and its interpretation may vary depends on law enforcement. In general, the aircraft accident hardly results in damage or loss to the 3rd-party. Additionally, it is worth to review newly enacted clause and to define its applicability. When the 3rd party is suffered from damage or loss incurred by any external act, it is necessary to explicit the concept of the non-contractual liabilities with respect to 3rd party. From the perspective of protecting aviation industries, the commercial aviation operator may be entitled to immunity in respect of claim for damage incurred by the event of Force Majeure. However, this approach is directly opposite to the victim's benefit and protection by the law. Therefore, the priority of the legal protection should be considered. Although the interest of the commercial aviation operator is not negligible, the protection of the law should be favorable to the 3rd party. Otherwise, the innocent party has no right to claim for damage incurred by aviation accident. Another issue is about the possibility of overlapping of the provision set forth in the paragraph 1 and 4. The former states that the liabilities shall be exempted on account of either the unsettled political or economic situation but this clause is inconsistent with the interpretation on Force Majeure under the latter. As argued above, this may include any event resulted from either political or economic account by the external influence of the 3rd party, thus these two provisions are overlapped. Consequently, in order to develop ordinances and guidelines and to ensure an equal protection to both parties, above two issues must remain open for further discussions.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.14 no.1
• /
• pp.209-236
• /
• 2013

The concept of expectation rights considers 'the expectation' that the patient should be given proper medical treatment as the benefit and protection of the law, so it would be the benefit and protection of the law due to personal rights different from 'the legal principle that has the possibility to a considerable extent' being in an extension of life and body. However, the problem how the patient's expectation of medical service sets up in order to make it the benefit and protection of the law would be still left in the vague concept of the patient's 'expectation', thus, in the first place, the medical practice following formed medical standard in every particular medical institutes should be the standard because these medical services are normally within a range of the patients' expectations. In addition, it should be naturally constituted as mental profit to get the subjective circumstances such as 'the patient's expectation' to be an object, and also, different from the profit and protection of the law such as life and body that should be absolutely protected, the origin of violation behavior should be regarded simultaneously to define the denotation of expectation rights. Therefore, the expectation rights violations would be problematic in case it fails to reach the medical standard that is expected for common doctors to practice properly. This is the concept of expectation rights that gets subjective matters such as the patient's expectation to be objectivity as medical practices that can be expected by generalized abstract doctors. This standard should be defined as the minimum standard that is naturally expected for doctors to practice, different from medical standard that decides the level of doctors.

• Korean Security Journal
• /
• no.43
• /
• pp.231-257
• /
• 2015

Today, the international community make every effort to suppress security crimes, to provide numerous institutional strategies and to prevent security crimes such as the terrorism and spy. Particularly, developed countries in the field of security are strengthening related legislation under new-security conditions. Things work a little differently about security crimes because the nation's benefit and protection of the law is the basis of individual benefit and protection of the law under investigation procedure of the security crimes. Therefore they have policy that permits major investigative agency under the arrest and detention procedure(e.g. security and communication monitoring ${\ldots}$). Criminal procedure's improvement and reinforcement are very important for events related security. But, The investigation procedure between criminal offense and security crimes makes no odds in the Korea. Continuance of such a national mood will accuse of not responding appropriately in preparation for new-security conditions recently. To revise with international best security legislation, We should institute a proper registration system in Korea's situation. This study have been discussing how to improve related legislation under new-security conditions through the cases analysis of the arrest and detention procedure in Korea.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.21 no.2
• /
• pp.75-103
• /
• 2020

There is a growing voice that medical information should be shared because it can prepare for genetic diseases or cancer by analyzing and utilizing medical information in big data or artificial intelligence to develop medical technology and improve patient care. The utilization and protection of patients' personal information are the same as two sides of the same coin. Medical institutions or medical personnel should take extra caution in handling personal information with high environmental distinct characteristics and sensitivity, which is different from general information processors. In general, the patient's personal information is processed by medical personnel or medical institutions through the processes of collection, creation, and destruction. Still, the use of terms related to personal information in the Medical Service Act is jumbled, or the scope of application is unclear, so it relies on the interpretation of precedents. For the medical personnel or the founder of the medical institution, in the case of infringement of Article 24(4), it cannot be regarded that it means only medical treatment information among personal information, whether or not it should be treated the same as the personal information under Article 23, because the sensitive information of patients is recorded, saved, and stored in electronic medical records. Although the prohibition of information leakage under Article 19 of the Medical Service Act has a revision; 'secret' that was learned in business was revised to 'information', but only the name was changed, and the benefit and protection of the law is the same as the 'secret' of the criminal law, such that the patient's right to self-determination of personal information is not protected. The Privacy Law and the Local Health Act consider the benefit and protection of the law in 'information learned in business' as the right to self-determination of personal information and stipulate the same penalties for personal information infringement such as leakage, forgery, alteration, and damage. The privacy regulations of the Medical Service Act require that the terms be adjusted uniformly because the jumbled use of terms can confuse information subjects, information processors, and shows certain limitations on the protection of personal information because the contents or scope of the regulations of the Medical Service Law for special corporations and the Privacy Law may cause confusion in interpretation. The patient's personal information is sensitive and must be safely protected in its use and processing. Personal information must be processed in accordance with the protection principle of Privacy Law, and the rights such as privacy, freedom, personal rights, and the right to self-determination of personal information of patients or guardians, the information subject, must be guaranteed.

• Korean journal of communication and information
• /
• v.76
• /
• pp.151-182
• /
• 2016

The right to be forgotten (RTBF) has been a population notion to address privacy issues associated with the digitalization of information and the dissemination of such information over the global digital network. In May 2014, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) laid down a landmark RTBF decision to grant individuals the right to be de-listed from search results. ECJ's RTBF decision sparked an increased interest in RTBF in South Korea. Academic and non-academic commentators have provided a mistaken or outstretched interpretation of RTBF in claiming that removal of news articles should be read into RTBF in Korean law. Moreover, the Press Arbitration Commission of Korea (PAC) has proposed revising the Press Arbitration Act (PAA) to allow the alleged victims of news reporting to request the deletion of news stories. This article examines the notion of RTBF from its origin to the latest development abroad and also critically explores Korean laws regulation freedom of expression to evaluate if Korea needs the proposed PAA revision.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.23 no.3
• /
• pp.117-137
• /
• 2022

Today, the medical system is changing into a comprehensive health care system in which collaborative relationships between medical professionals and non-medical personnels in neighboring occupational areas. The current medical act brands such "collaboration" as unlicensed medical practice, and punishes non-medical personnel who acted in the risk management of doctors as well as doctors collaborated with non-medical personnel as unlicensed medical practice. In order to narrow the gap between the legal system that regulates unlicensed medical practices and the medical reality, it is necessary to overcome the structural limitations of dualistic, nationalistic, and identity-oriented regulation of unlicensed medical practices. The legal interests of unlicensed medical practice have a dual nature as a personal legal interest of "human life and body" as well as a national legal interest of "maintenance and protection of the nation's medical license system", and it should be noted that the criteria for judging the legal interests protected by the regulations of criminal punishment should be found in "personal legal interest theory." In addition, when determining which behavior is a medical practice and evaluating its risk, the dimension of behavior and measures should be considered in a fair manner without being biased against the subject (identity) of the action. In other words, judging unlicensed medical practice should depend on whether the risk of side effects that may result from the act is reasonably managed. Considering the prospect of therapeutic dialogue between medical professionals and patients, it would be desirable for medical law policies to move in a way that does not fundamentally block the possibility of collaboration among pluralistic medical personalities.