• Journal of Acupuncture Research
• /
• 제29권4호
• /
• pp.71-79
• /
• 2012

Objectives : The purpose of this study is to set the explanatory duty on traditional Korean medical(TKM) treatment by analyzing the judicial precedents. Methods : The study was performed by analyzing nine cases of lawsuits related to Korean medicine doctor and explanatory duty among the medical dispute cases in Korea from 1968 through 2012. Results : Nine closed claims occurred regarding the violation of explanatory duties in the field of TKM practice. Two claims were decided by supreme court, three were decided by high court, and four were decided by district court. The causes of lawsuits were categorized as follows : bee venom pharmacopuncture, herb treatment, and an explanation for safety. Conclusions : To perform an explanatory duty has important legal implications for the protection of patients' rights and Korean Medicine doctors' autonomy on TKM treatment.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제24권2호
• /
• pp.79-117
• /
• 2023

2002년 의료 관련 선고된 판결들 중에는 , 환자의 자기결정권 행사를 보장하기 위하여 구체적인 상황에서 환자에게 의료행위의 위험성과 부작용 등에 관하여 충분히 숙고한 후 결정할 수 있는 시간적 여유가 주어져야 한다는 점을 명시하면서 설명의무의 이행시기와 관련된 의미 있는 판결이 있었다. 또한 보험회사가 실손보험상품 가입자들을 대위하여 의료기관에 대해 부당이득반환을 청구한 사례에서 채권자대위권의 보전의 필요성 관련 적극적 요건과 소극적 요건을 분설하여 명확한 기준을 제시한 판결이 있었다. 의료행정 영역에서는, 국민건강보험법에 따른 요양기관 업무정지처분의 성격을 대물적처분으로 명확히 한 판결, 코로나 백신투여 부작용에 대한 보상 인정 사례에서 인과관계를 폭 넓게 인정한 판결 및 한의사의 초음파 의료기기 사용 등 의료인의 면허범위 관련 판결이 있었다. 환자에 대한 의료기관의 퇴거 청구 사례에서 의료법 제15조 제1항과 관련하여 입원진료계약의 해지에 관한 정당한 사유에 대한 판결을 검토하였다.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제18권1호
• /
• pp.297-341
• /
• 2017

2016년에 선고된 의료관련 판결들을 법원도서관 검색사이트와 법률전문기사를 통해 검색하여 다음과 같이 분석 소개하였다. 의료민사와 관련하여 (1) 제왕절개 수술 시 불임수술도 함께 청약하였으나 불임수술은 하지 아니한 사례에서는 의료계약체결과정에 판시의 결여에 대한 아쉬움과 함께 침해되는 권리 및 배상범위를, (2) 의료과실 추정 관련에서는 과실추정법리의 한계를 벗어난다는 점과 한의사의 협진의무를 매우 높은 정도로 요구했다는 점을, (3) 병원측 책임을 100% 인정한 사건에서는 의료행위의 선의성과 불확실성에 대한 간과를 지적하면서, (4) 정신과 환자 관련 사고에서 병원책임을 인정한 사건들을 관련판결과 함께 소개하였다. 의료형사와 관련해서는 치과의사의 안면 보톡스 시술이 면허범위 내 의료행위인지 여부에 대한 대법원 전원합의체 판결을 다수의견의 해석이 법문언의 가능한 범위 내에 있는지의 관점에서 분석하였다. 그리고 의료행정과 관련하여 (1) 의료인이 다중으로 의료기관을 운영한 경우 이에 대하여 국민건강보험법상 환수처분을 할 수 있는지 여부를 다중으로 운영된 의료기관이 의료법에 따라 개설된 의료기관에 해당하는지의 관점에서 분석하고, (2) 임의비급여진료 동의의 전제로서 설명의무에 관한 판결을 설명의 대상, 정도, 주체의 면에서 검토하였다. 마지막으로 정신질환자 보호입원 사건에서 제청된 보호의무자 2인의 동의와 정신건강의학과전문의 1인의 진단에 의하여 정신질환자를 입원시킬 수 있도록 한 정신보건법 제24조에 대하여 위헌법률심판결정에 대해 소개하면서 개정된 정신보건법에 대한 문제점을 아울러 제시하였다.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제13권1호
• /
• pp.199-247
• /
• 2012

According to the review and analysis of medical cases that are assigned to the Supreme Court and all local High Court in 2011 and that are presented in the media, it was found that the following categories were taken seriously, medical and pharmaceutical product liability, the third principle of trust between medical institutions, negligence and causation estimation, responsibility limit, the meaning of medical records and related judgment of disturbed substantiation, Oriental doctors' duties to explain the procedures, IMS events, whether one can claim for each medical care operated by non-physician health care institutions to the nonmedical domain in the National Health Insurance Corporation, and the basis of norms for each claim. In the cases related to medical pharmaceutical product liability, Supreme Court alleviated burden of proof for accidents with medical and pharmaceutical products prior to the practice of Product Liability Law and onset the point of negative prescription as the time of damage strikes to condition feasibility of the specific situation. In the cases related to the 3rd principle of trust between medical institutions, the Supreme Court refused to sentence the doctor who has trusted the judgment of the same third-party doctors the violations of the care duty. With respect to proof of a causal relationship and damages in a medical negligence case, the Supreme Court decided that it is unjust to deny negligence by the materials of causal relationship rejecting the original verdict and clarified that the causal relationship shall not deny the reasons to limit doctors' responsibilities. In order not put burden on patients with disadvantages in which medical records and the description of the practice or the most fundamental and important evidence to prove negligence and causation are being neglected, the Supreme Court admitted in the hospital's responsibility for the case of the neonate death of suffocation without properly listed fetal heart rate and uterine contraction monitor. On the other hand, the Seoul Western District Court has admitted alimony for altering and forging medical records. With respect to doctors' obligations to description, the Supreme Court decided that it is necessary to explain the foreseen risks by the combination of oriental and western medicines emphasizing the right of patient's self-determination. However, questions have arisen whether it is realistically feasible or not. In a case of an unlicensed doctor performing intramuscular stimulation treatment (IMS), the Supreme Court put off its decision if it was an unlicensed medical practice as to put limitation of eastern and western medical practices, but it declared that IMS practice was an acupuncture treatment therefore the plaintiff's conduct being an illegal act. In the future, clear judgment on this matter should be made. With respect to the claim of bills from non-physical health care institutions, the Supreme Court decided to void it for the implementation of the arrangement is contrary to the commitments made in the medical law and therefore, it is invalid to claim. In addition, contrast to the private healthcare professionals, who are subject to redemption according to the National Healthcare Insurance Law, the Seoul High Court explicitly confirmed that the non-professionals who receive the tort operating profit must return the unjust enrichment and have the liability for damages. As mentioned above, a relatively wide range of topics were discussed in medical field of 2011. In Korea's health care environment undergoing complex changes day by day, it is expected to see more diverse and in-depth discussions striding out to the development in the field of health care.