• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.18 no.1
• /
• pp.297-341
• /
• 2017

We searched out court rulings on medical affairs through court library search sites and specialized articles on medically relevant judgments sentenced in 2016. And we selected and analyzed the judgements of the court we considered important as follows. In relation to the medical civil judgements, (1) In the case of applying surgery for female infertility during cesarean section operation but it has not been done, we expressed the regret for the lack of judgment in the process of entering the medical contract, introducing the rights infringed and the scope of compensation, (2) We pointed out that the ruling on the medical malpractice estimation goes out of limit of negligence estimation doctrine, and that the court asked very high degree duty of the traditional Korean medicine doctors to cooperate with Western medicine doctors. (3) In the case of admitting hospital's 100% responsibility, we pointed out the court overlooked the uncertainty and good intention of the medical practice. (4) Additionally, We introduced the cases admitted the hospital's responsibility in the accident related to the psychiatric patients in closed ward. Relating to a medical criminal ruling, we analyzed the supreme court decision about whether the dentist's Botox injection on the patient's face is a medical practice within the scope of the license from the viewpoint whether it is within the possible range of the word. And, concerning decisions on healthcare administration, (1) we analyzed the case about when medical personnel operate multiple medical institutions, whether it is possible to get back medical care costs under the National Health Insurance Law, (2) We commented on the ruling regarding explanation obligation in terms of object, degree, subject of explanation as a prerequisite for permissible arbitrary uninsured benefits. Finally, we reviewed the decision of the Constitutional Court about the Article 24 of the Mental Health Law, which it had allowed for a mental patient to be hospitalized forcibly by the consent of two guardians and a diagnosis of a psychiatrist. Also we indicated the problems of the revised Mental Health Law.

• The Journal of the Convergence on Culture Technology
• /
• v.4 no.2
• /
• pp.33-42
• /
• 2018

The Patient Safety Act was enacted on July 26, 2016. Patient safety law is a method to prevent harm by collecting and accumulating various errors through the reporting system. Therefore, in order for this law to be successfully implemented, it is necessary to vitalize 'the autonomous reporting and reporting learning system of patient safety accidents'. And In order for this system to be activated, a large amount of reporting data accumulation is a prerequisite. Nevertheless, there were only two reports in about 17 months. In this paper, I will criticize the validity of the current autonomous reporting system and the two proposed amendments, I would like to propose the introduction of a partial obligation reporting system.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.10 no.1
• /
• pp.117-168
• /
• 2009

Generally, criminal law protect the human life after he/she has born. Before the birth, the life of fetus are protected by prohibition of abortion, not of murder. Also, the fetus is not considered as an object of infliction of injury. A popular opinion and case law say that the fetus becomes a person at the point of an outset labor pains. Recently, some theories allege that traditional opinions is not sufficient in the case of induced delivery, so it should be decided by norm, not by a simple fact, whether a unborn child is a fetus or a person, and that the fetus should be considered as an object of infliction of injury. These theories can be meaningful because these could protect human life more comprehensively. In the other side, however, these could harm the legal stability and bring the excessive punishment. Abortion of negligence is not punishable in criminal law, and there is little possibility of the fetus injury without the injury of the pregnant woman. And the Contergan Case, if it happened again, must be dealt with as crime about environment or public health more severely. These new approaches are in conflict with the principle of "nulla poena sine lege" and other fundamental rules of the criminal law, and should lead to the excessive punishment and criminal provisions. Accordingly, the decision of Supreme Court of Korea about the beginning point of human being should be maintained.

• Fire Science and Engineering
• /
• v.19 no.4 s.60
• /
• pp.47-56
• /
• 2005

The regulation on organization and operation of rescue and aid party was amended. This Regulation is designed to provide legal formality in order to protect not only the patients' right but also 119 rescuers from liability, which is due to treatment refusal by patient and the discretionary refusal of transfer by 119 rescuers on the non-emergency situation. This study looked over the constitute of violation of emergency medical service act related to the discretionary refusal of 119 rescuers, the criminal liability owing to omission and the possibility of national indemnities on the damage of patients. This study also analyzed the courts' decision and attitude by exploring overseas judicial precedents and examined what should be considered on the execution of the newly enacted law. Finally, this study put emphasis on the importance of medical director's control, documentation of every procedure, 119 rescuer's authorization on the refusal of transfer by securing patient's informed consent.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.23 no.2
• /
• pp.119-139
• /
• 2022

Brain stimulation technology that administers electrical and magnetic stimulation to a brain has shown a significant level of possibility for treating a wide range of various neurological and psychiatric disorders. Depending on its nature, the technology is defined either as invasive or non-invasive, and deep brain stimulation (DBS) is one of the most well-known invasive brain stimulation technologies. Currently categorized as grade 4 medical device in accordance with Guideline On Medical Devices And Their Grades, a Notification of Ministry of Food and Drug Safety (MFDS), the DBS has been used as a stable treatment for several diseases. At the same time, the DBS technology has recently achieved substantial advancement, encouraging active discussions for its use from various perspectives. On the contrary, debates over legal regulation related to the use of DBS has relatively been smaller in numbers. In this context, this article aims to 1) introduce the DBS technology and its safety in setting out the tone; 2) touch upon major legal issues that would potentially rise from its use for four different purposes of treatment, clinical study, areas of non-standard treatment where no other methods are available, and enhancement; and finally 3) highlight disputes concerning common emerging issues observed in the aforementioned four purposes from the viewpoint of legal responsibility and liability of using the DBS, which are benefit-risk assessment, physicians' duty of information, patients' capacity to consent, control for device, and insurance coverage.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.21 no.2
• /
• pp.209-244
• /
• 2020

TMS and tDCS are non-invasive devices that treat the diseases of patients or individual users, and manage or improve their health by applying stimulation to a brain through magnetism and electricity. The effect and safety of these devices have proved to be valid in several diseases, but research in this area is still much going on. Despite increasing cases of their application, legislations directly regulating TMS and tDCS are hard to find. Legal regulation regarding TMS and tDCS in the United States, Germany and Japan reveals that while TMS has been approved as a medical device with a moderate risk, tDCS has not yet earned approval as a medical device. However, the recent FDA guidance, European MDR changes, recalls in the US, and relevant legal provisions of Germany and Japan, as well as recommendations from expert groups all show signs of tDCS growing closer to getting approved as a medical device. Of course, safety and efficacy of tDCS can still be regulated as a general product instead of as a medical device. Considering multiple potential impacts on a human brain, however, the need for independent regulation is urgent. South Korea also lacks legal provisions explicitly regulating TMS and tDCS, but they fall into the category of the grade 3 medical devices according to the notifications of the Korean Ministry of Food and Drug Safety. And safety and efficacy of TMS are to be evaluated in compliance with the US FDA guidance. But no specific guidelines exist for tDCS yet. Given that tDCS devices are used in some hospitals in reality, and also at home by individual buyers, such a regulatory gap must quickly be addressed. In a longer term, legal system needs to be in place capable of independently regulating non-invasive brain stimulating devices.

• Journal of Digital Convergence
• /
• v.20 no.1
• /
• pp.15-23
• /
• 2022

There is little research about medical treatment after prison. The purpose of this study is to examine factors influencing mentally-ill prisoner's decision making for medical treatment on release from prison. With the data collected from prisoners in 2019, binary logistic regression was used to analyze the effect of variables on the mentally-ill prisoner's decision making. In result, bipolar disorder, depression, anxiety disorder, and panic disorder decreased the likelihood of answering that I will have no medical treatment plan after prison, whereas lack of experience in receiving medical care increased the likelihood of answering as such. Bipolar disorder, anxiety disorder, counseling, medical treatment, and education had a positive effect on selecting mental hospital in the answer. Depression enhanced the likelihood of choosing mental health center for treatment. Policy implications and directions for future research are discussed.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.23 no.3
• /
• pp.3-44
• /
• 2022

As a result of a close review focusing on the case of obstruction of epidemiological investigation by a religious group A in Daegu, which was a problem when the pandemic of Covid-19 infection began in Korea around February 2, 2020, when an epidemiological investigator requested a specific group to submit a list, While there have been cases where an act of not responding or submitting an edited omission list was sentenced to the effect that the act did not fall under an epidemiological investigation, in the case of non-submission of the visitor list for the B Center, even though a 'list of visitors' was requested. Regarding the fact of refusal without a justifiable reason, 'providing a list of persons entering the building is a key factual act that forms a link between epidemiological investigations accompanying an epidemiological investigation, and refusing to do so is also an act of refusal and obstruction of an epidemiological investigation. There are cases where it is possible to demand criminal punishment. Regardless of whether the request for submission of the membership list falls under the epidemiological investigation, there are cases in which the someones' actions correspond to the refusal or obstruction of the epidemiological investigation. A lower court ruling that if an epidemiological investigation is rejected or obstructed as a result of interfering with factual acts accompanying an epidemiological investigation, comprehensively considering whether or not the list has been diverted for purposes other than epidemiological investigation, the logic is persuasive. Epidemiological investigations such as surveys and human specimen collection and testing are conducted for each infectious disease patient or contact confirmed as a result of the epidemiological investigation, but epidemiological investigations conducted on individual individuals cannot exist independently of each other, and the This is because the process of identification and tracking is essential to an epidemiological investigation, and if someone intentionally interferes with or rejects the process of confirming this link, it will result in direct, realistic, and widespread interference with the epidemiological investigation. In this article, ① there are differences between an epidemiological investigation and a request for information provision under the Infectious Disease Control and Prevention Act, but there are areas that fall under the epidemiological investigation even in the case of a request for information, ② Considering the medical characteristics of COVID-19 and the continuity of the epidemiological investigation, the epidemiological investigator the fact that the act of requesting a list may fall under the epidemiological investigation, ③ that the offense of obstructing the epidemiological investigation in certain cases may constitute 'obstruction of Performance of Official Duties by Fraudulent Means', and ④ rejecting the request for information provision under the Infectious Disease Control and Prevention Act from September 29, 2020 In this case, it is intended to be helpful in the application of the Infectious Disease control and Prevention Act and the practical operation of epidemiological investigations in the future by pointing out the fact that a new punishment regulation of imprisonment or fine is being implemented.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.16 no.2
• /
• pp.27-53
• /
• 2015

Recently, a plastic surgery hospital in Seoul, has been raided following suspicions that ghost surgery was performed by an unauthorized substitute surgeon on a chinese woman who lapsed into a death. Following the incident, an organization to eradicate ghost surgery was created in March by Consumers Korea, founded to protect consumer rights, and the Korea Alliance of Patients Organization. The organization has received reports of illegal medical practices. To substitute another physician without the patient's consent and without his knowledge of the substitution is fraud and deceit and a violation of a basic ethical concept. The patient as a human being is entitled to choose his own physician and he should be permitted to acquiesce in or refuse to accept the substitution. It should be noted that it is the operating surgeon to whom the patient grants his consent to perform the operation. The patient is entitled to the services of the particular surgeon with whom he contracts. The surgeon, in accepting the patient, obligates himself to utilize his personal talents in the performance of the operation to the extent required by the agreement creating the physician-patient relationship. He cannot properly delegate to another the duties which the patient authorizes him to perform personally. 'Ghost surgery' comes under Article 257(Inflicting Bodily Injury on Other or on Lineal Ascendant) of the Criminal Code. Substitution another physician without the patient's consent and without his knowledge of the substitution shall be performed Inflicting Bodily Injury. This is a controversial issue that'ghost surgery' comes under Article 347(Fraud) of the Criminal Code. It maybe controversial that operation substituted by another physician without the patient's consent and without his knowledge of the substitution becomes the component of Fraud. Also, Ghost surgery' comes under Article 27 (Prohibition of Unlicensed Medical Practice, etc.), Article 22 (Medical Records, etc.), Article 33 (Establishment) of the Medical Service Act. The surgeon's obligation to the patient requires him to perform the surgical operation: (1) within the scope of authority granted him by the consent to the operation; (2) in accordance with the terms of the contractual relationship; (3) with complete disclosure of all facts relevant to the need and the performance of the operation; and (4) to utilize his best skill in performing the operation.

• Journal of Digital Convergence
• /
• v.19 no.10
• /
• pp.21-28
• /
• 2021

This study examines factors affecting correction officer's preference toward institute for forensic psychiatric. The data were collected from the correction officers who worked at the six correctional facilities in 2019. Binary logistic regression was used to find the factors on the officer's preference. The result showed that the correction officers had their own preference toward prison for forensic psychiatric, and the preference was positively related to the age of the officer, work experience at the mental health center, mentally-ill prisoner's fighting as the rule-violation in prison, refusal of medical treatment, and lack of laws and regulations for the mentally-ill prisoners. In contrast, there was a negative relationship between the officer's rank and the preference for forensic psychiatric. More work needs to be done in the future research to collect more samples and include a broader ranger of variables than now.