• Title/Summary/Keyword: 형사면책의 범위

Search Result 2, Processing Time 0.019 seconds

Categorization of medical activities in the essential surgical field that require criminal immunity -As part of solving the manpower shortage in essential medical hospitals in the surgical field- (형사면책이 필요한 외과계 필수의료행위의 범주화 - 외과계 필수의료 병원 인력난 해결을 위한 일환으로 -)

  • Phils Kim
    • The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
    • /
    • v.24 no.1
    • /
    • pp.101-130
    • /
    • 2023
  • Korea has very easy access to tertiary hospitals, including university hospitals, among OECD countries, and patients can reach the emergency room of a university hospital within 1-2 hours. However, there are many so-called 'essential medical' blind spots where people die because they do not receive surgery in time. In particular, in the case of essential medical care in the surgical field, despite basic surgery, there is a shortage of medical staff to perform outpatient surgery in emergency situations at university hospitals. Although this lack of manpower has a problem with low insurance premiums for surgery, it also has a very large impact on the burden of criminal liability for medical malpractice, which increases the incidence in case of emergencies. Here, we propose crime immunity to solve the manpower shortage of converged smart surgical essential medical (SES) hospitals. Currently, the medical community agrees on the need for crime immunity, but it is an ambiguous scope of immunity that has not reached a national consensus. We would like to present clear standards for essential medical practices (surgery) that require criminal immunity.

The Statute of the International Criminal Court of the Control Crime Due to the Regulation Coat Investigators of ICC (ICC규정상 ICC수사관에 의한 단속범죄의 한계)

  • Yoo In-Chang
    • The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
    • /
    • v.6 no.1
    • /
    • pp.85-92
    • /
    • 2006
  • It seems extremely incongruous that genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes could ever be justified or excused by 'defensive force'- self-defence, defence of others and defence of property. Nonetheless, art 31(1)(c) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court codifies defensive force as a ground for excluding criminal responsibility. This provision was controversial and extremely difficult to negotiate at the Rome Conference of 1998, largely due to the conceptual differences that exist in respect of criminal defences between the various domestic legal systems of the world. This paper analyses the drafting history and wording of art 31(1)(c) in order to clarify the precise scope of defensive force under the Rome Statute. It then seeks to ascertain the applicability of the provision to genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes, and to thereby explore the nature of these crimes and the intended prosecutorial strategy of the International Criminal Court.

  • PDF