• Journal of Korea Water Resources Association
• /
• v.40 no.1 s.174
• /
• pp.63-72
• /
• 2007

The main purpose of this study is that financial resources allocation criteria are examined closely between central government and local government as well as among local government in a river basin. Financial resources allocation principles reflecting water use, flood control, and water quality improvement are reviewed and derived two categories such as common factors and individual factors. The weights of each factor are assigned by analytical hierarchy process. The results of applying four river basins (Han river, Geum river, Nakdong river, Yeongsan-seumjin river) show that rational raising of financial resources are different according to the characteristics of each river basin. Findings are as follows: In case of Han river and Yeongsan Seumjin river, benefit principle and polluter pay principle by individual factors are more attractive than other Principles. Solvency principle by common factor is more acceptable than the other principles in Nakdong-river and Geum-river.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.19 no.2
• /
• pp.139-171
• /
• 2018

The 「Act on Remedies for Injuries from Medical Malpractice and Mediation of Medical Disputes」(hereinafter referred to as 'the Act on Mediation of Medical Disputes') provides that the state should compensate the victims of medical accidents occurred irresistibly in childbirth despite that health and medical service personnel fulfilled their duty of care for their damage within the range of its budget(Article 46 of the Act on Mediation of Medical Disputes). Given that victims of medical accidents could expect demage recovery only through lawsuits thus far, this act can be said to be a groundbreaking act. However, However, as 30% of the costs for such medical accident compensation projects are borne by those who have records of childbirth among the founders of health and medical institutions (Article 21 of the Act on Mediation of Medical Disputes), there has been a question about whether doctors are held responsible despite that the accidents such as the deaths of mothers and newborn babies occurred irresistibly without doctors' fault. However, recently, the Constitutional Court ruled that 'the range of founders of health and medical institutions' and 'share ratios of finances for compensation' in Article 46 (3) of the Act on Mediation of Medical Disputes' related to the imposition of the share of costs are institutional (Constitutional Court ruling dated April 26, 2018, 2015Heonga13, hereinafter referred to as 'the ruling in the case'). Although the ruling in the case was made based on only the principle of statutory reservation and the principle of ban on comprehensive authorization, this paper added a practical judgment. This paper proved that the share of costs in this case has the nature of burden charges in pursuit of study and does not infringe on the property rights of the founders of health medical institutions even in light of the principle of proportionality because there is a legitimate reason for imposing the burden charge. The imposition of the share of costs in the system for compensation for medical accidents occurred irresistibly is against the principle of liability with fault in part. However, the medical accident compensation projects are rational a national policy for the victims of medical accidents and the medical world clearly gains some benefits from the effect to terminate medical disputes. The expansion of finances for compensation through the payments of the share of costs will reduce the suffering and misunderstanding of victims of medical accidents occurred in the process of childbirth and will be very helpful to the construction of stable treatment environments of medical workers by quickly establishing the medical accident compensation projects as such.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.21 no.1
• /
• pp.153-185
• /
• 2020

In principle, even if serious consequences such as death or serious injury of a patient occur as a result of a medical accident, if the medical malpractice of a health care worker is not recognized, the health care worker is not held liable for said consequences. However, with the opening of the Korea Medical Dispute Mediation and Arbitration Agency on April 7, 2012, a system was established to compensate health care personnel for their medical malpractices only in the case of "injuries caused by medical accidents in the course of childbirth" (hereinafter referred to as "program for compensation of medical accidents"). Article 46 paragraph 1 of the current Medical Dispute Mediation Act, which is the basis of the Force Majeure Medical Accident Compensation System, stipulates that "medical accidents under delivery" claims are to be determined by the Medical Accident Compensation Review Committee are subject to the compensation project. And the details of the compensation, ratio of sharing financial resources for compensation, scope of compensation, and the guidelines and procedure for the payment of compensations are prescribed by Presidential Decree. In other words, the Presidential Decree requires the state to pay 70 percent of the compensation funds, and 30 percent of the above funds among health care providers. The Constitutional Court has decided on the 2015Hun-Ga13 that the scope of the health care institution's founders and the share of the compensation funds cannot be directly determined by the law, and that the portion delegated by the Presidential decree does not violate the Principle of Legal Protection nor Comprehensive Nondelegation Doctrine. However, this can be seen as an exclusion of accountability for force-induced delivery accidents even if there is no negligence of the medical staff. If the nature of the system is a type of social security system with a social compensatory nature, it could consider eliminating the health care innovator's cost-sharing provisions, leaving the full cost to the state. However, it is also necessary to review institutional protocols that strengthen the efforts of medical institutions in areas such as analysis of the causes of medical accidents and measures to prevent their recurrence. In addition, I think that the conclusion of the Act is in line with the purpose of the Comprehensive Wage Support Regulations that at minimum the law sets an upper limit of the compensation funds that are to be paid by health and medical institutions. Moreover, it is reasonable for the Medical Accident Compensation Review Committee to specify gestational age and weight of births, which are the criteria for compensation, under the Enforcement Decree of the Medical Dispute Mediation Act, in relation to the criteria for payment of contributions by the Medical Accident Compensation Review Committee, and to set the detailed criteria.