• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.15 no.2
• /
• pp.435-459
• /
• 2014

Supreme Court of Korea has been mitigating the burden of proof on the malpractice and causal relation by a patient in accordance with the practical transfer of such burden of proof on causal relation as well as relieving a doctor's burden of proof on mistake in the civil damage claim suits on the malpractice. However, a prosecutor shall strictly prove the causal relation between malpractice and unfavorable results as well as a doctor's mistake in the criminal cases for making a doctor accept the professional negligence resulting in death or injury in accordance with In Dubio Pro Reo principles. Furthermore, it shall not be allowed to relieve the burden of proof on malpractice and causal relation which has been frequently applied in the civil proceedings. Nevertheless, it was widely known that the front-line courts accepted the malpractice and causal relation by quoting the legal principles on relieving the burden of proof on malpractice and causal relation applied in the civil cases even in criminal cases with no or insufficient proof on malpractice or causal relation. However, the latest precedents in Supreme Court explicitly declared the opinion that there was no reason to apply the legal principle to relieve the burden of proof on the malpractice and causal relation in the criminal cases requiring the proof 'which doesn't cause any reasonable doubt' on malpractice and causal relation in accordance with the legal principles 'favorable judgment for a defendant in case of any doubt' on the basis of the strict principle of 'nulla poena sine lege.' Accordingly, Supreme court definitely clarified that there would be no reason to relieve the burden of proof on malpractice and causal relation in criminal cases by reversing several original judgments accepting malpractice and causal relation even though there were no strict evidence.

• Health Policy and Management
• /
• v.17 no.3
• /
• pp.1-25
• /
• 2007

Relative value scales introduced in 2001 remarkably improved health insurance fee schedule, but current relative value scales have many problems. In the beginning the government intended to introduce 'resource based relative value scales(RBRVSs)' like USA, but political adjustment of RBRVS studied in 19.17 weakened the relationship between relative value scale and resource consumption. So unbalance of health insurance fees are existing till now. Also relative value was not divided to physician work and practice expense, and malpractice fee was not divided separately. To correct the unbalance of current relative value scales, the refinement project of health insurance relative value scales started in 2003. The project team divided relative value scales into three components, which are physician work, practice expense, malpractice fee. Physician work was studied by professional organizations like Korean medical association. To develop the practice expense relative value, project team organized clinical practice expert panels(CPEPs) composed of physicians, nurses, and medical technicians. CPEPs constructed direct expense data like labor costs, material costs, equipment costs about each medical procedures. The practice expense relative values of medical procedures were developed by the allocation of the institution level direct & indirect costs according to CPEPs direct costs. Institution level direct & indirect costs were collected in 21 hospitals, 98 medical clinics, 53 dental clinics, 78 oriental clinics, and 46 pharmacies. The malpractice fee relative values were developed through the survey of malpractice related costs of hospitals, clinics, pharmacies. Putting together three components of relative values in one scale, the final relative values were made. The final relative values were calculated under budget neutrality by medical departments, that is, total relative value score of a department was same before and after the revision. but malpractice fee relative value scores were added to total scores of relative values. So total score of a department was increased by the malpractice fee relative value score of that department This project failed in making 'resource based' relative value scales in the true sense of the word, because the total relative value scores of medical departments were fixed. However the project team constructed the objective basis of relative value scale like physician's work, direct practice expense, malpractice fee. So step by step making process of the basis, the fixation of total scores by the departments will be resolved and the resource based relative value scale will be introduced in true sense.

• Health Policy and Management
• /
• v.9 no.2
• /
• pp.95-117
• /
• 1999

The purposes of the study was to analysis the factors on the physicians' indemnity experience and indemnity on malpractice. Data was collected from mail interview for the physicians from August, to October in 1996. Questions were asked to the physician who selected with random sample(n=8.338) about the opinion of malpractice insurance. experience that he(she) have requested the indemnity from patience. context of experienced indemnity and demographic characteristics of physician and patience. Response rate is 37.5%(n=3,124). This study was analyzed in two levels' the first. influential factors on whether physician has experience of indemnity and the second. influential factors of indemnity among physicians who had experienced the indemnity. The major findings were as follows : 1. Logistic regression on whether physicians had experience of indemnity request was conducted. And it indicated that statistically meaningful variables of model 1 (about all physicians) were department of surgery, physicians who have intention of insurance fee, physician age and income, physicians who owned the hospitals and statistically meaningful variables of model 11 (about physicians who owned the hospital) were department of surgery and internal treatment. 2. Multiple regression on the influential factors on indemnity was conducted. And it showed that statistically meaningful variables in model 1 were method of malpractice quarrel(physician association), whether physician had malpractice, whether suit succeeded, physician age, average practice time and income and whether physician owned the hospital and statistically meaningful variables of model 11 were whether physician had malpractice, number of outpatient, number of beds. As the conclusion, the thesis was examined about the variables related with experience of indemnity and cost of malpractice. But in order to prevent malpractice and promote medical quality, the reasonable system to solve a malpractice have to settle and cost estimation on malpractice is essential. Therefore an advanced research is progressed with methodology to decide the indemnity bases.

• The Journal of Korean Medicine Ophthalmology and Otolaryngology and Dermatology
• /
• v.25 no.3
• /
• pp.78-87
• /
• 2012

Objective : The purpose of this study is to describe the characteristics of medical malpractice related to pediatric ophthalmology and to identify the causes and potential preventability of medical litigation in Korean medicine. Methods : A study was performed by analysing 8 cases of lawsuit in the year between 1968 and 2011, which were selected among the medical dispute cases involving pediatric ophthalmology. Results : The eight closed claims occurring in the field of pediatric ophthalmology were founded in the data for medical malpractice. One claim was supreme court decision, two claims were high court decisions and five claims were district court decisions. Conclusions : While malpractice claims occurring in the field of pediatric ophthalmology were uncommon, they resulted in a high rate and amount of indemnity payments. For reduction of medical disputes, improvement of clinical trials and clinical medical cares is emphasized, and informed consent is also important.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.19 no.1
• /
• pp.143-163
• /
• 2018

Implant procedure belongs to so called a commercialized medical treatment, its procedure is simple and clear, and the possibility of success is almost 100%. In addition, it is a selective method rather than an inevitable method for a patient's health, so the importance of liability for explanation is especially emphasized for protection of autonomous decisions by patients. Considering these characteristics, the plaintiff in the relevant case said that the contract of implant procedure has the characteristic of subcontract, and only the failure of implant itself and the violation of liability for explanation should be the defendant's fault liability. In addition, although the above procedure contract is considered as delegation rather than subcontract, whether it's the defendant's malpractice should be judged by general people's common sense rather than average people in the industry. Therefore, if all the implanted teeth were removed due to bleeding and pains, and the patient suffered from dysaesthesia during the process, the defendant's malpractice is fully proved. When the judgements of implant medical malpractice were researched, the court doesn't consider implant contract as subcontract, but it judges dentist's malpractice by whether the implant itself is successful, so it seems that the court acknowledges similar characteristics with subcontract whose purpose is completion of work to some degree. In addition, considering the detailed contents of presented medical malpractices, it seems that judging medical malpractice is based on the common sense of general people. Therefore, the argument of the plaintiff is valid when the fact the adjustment amount is relevant to the amount that the plaintiff initially claimed is considered even though the relevant case was decided to be compulsory mediation.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.22 no.2
• /
• pp.49-79
• /
• 2021

Due to defendant's wrongful act by implant surgery, plaintiff has been suffered serious damages to his face and teeth, and pain caused by establishing implanted teeth. Jeonju Appellate Court sentenced to pay future medical expenses and alimony to the plaintiff in compensation for breach of duty or torts. The ruling is designed to relieve the burden of proof because it is extremely difficult for non-experts to determine whether dentists violated their 'duty of care' or whether there was a causal relationship between damages to medial treatment. It was judged that if symptoms that contributed to the patient's significant outcome occurred during or after surgery, such symptoms could be presumed to have been caused by medical negligence if indirect facts were proven to be other than medical negligence. Originally, the shifting of burden of proof in Germany, has already been developed in medical malpractice case since 1940s. In order to guarantee the patients' right, §630h German Civil Code (BGB) - presumption of negligence in the realization of controllable risk- has been also legislated. BGH (Bundesgerichtshof) has been interested in ensuring that the principle of equality between patients and doctors. So, in this study, we wanted to refer to German precedent cases to analyzing Korean medical malpractice lawsuit. In particular, the decision could be significant in that it approaches closer to allows the shifting burden of proof in drastically growing dental malpractice cases. This is clearly confirmed in the judgment of the dentist's "fault" that "if indirect facts about the symptom or occurrence are proven to be cause other than medical negligence, such symptoms can be presumed to be due to medical negligence."

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.10 no.2
• /
• pp.85-113
• /
• 2009

In this paper, the Judgment 2007DA76290 of the Korean Supreme Court was analysed in two points of the legal theory and litigation. The judgment arouses some issues of medical malpractice liability. They includes the concept of the complications and permanent lesion and the difference between them, some problems in a judge's applying the requirements for the physician's tort liability to the medical malpractice situations, the theory of obligation de moyens related with the burden of proof of the negligent conduct for a physician's liability for misperformance of contract, the influence of a patient's physical conditions on the physician's liability, the breach of duty to disclose in selecting the safer one of the treatment methods bringing about the complications or leaving the permanent lesion and so on. In the situations of the case referred to above, the plaintiff should have tried to establish that a reasonable physician in the specific situation of the case would have substituted the safer method of treatment for the method in the case. If the plaintiff had succeeded in establishing it, he or she could have recovered even the physical harm resulting from the permanent lesion brought about by the complications of the specific treatment in the case. The plaintiff failed to do so and recovered only the emotional distress which the patient suffered owing to the physician's breach of the duty to disclose. Therefore the legal malpractice of the counsel might be found in this case.

• The Korean Journal of Emergency Medical Services
• /
• v.3 no.1
• /
• pp.91-101
• /
• 1999

The medicolegal problem can be occurred in all medical field. Especially pre-hospital stage can be more exposed to the legal claims due to the very nature of EMT business and characteristics of ER patient or their family member. All Emergency Medical Technician should be concerned about the law associated with emergency care for handling the medicolegal problem, so the legally risky situations that may be occurred in pre-hospital stage and ER practice. This study reviewed malpractice claim of emergency patients filed in at Association of malpractice patients' family and two tertiary level hospitals. Problems related to treatment and misdiagnosis. Especially issues concerning emergency medical service system including of inadequate transport, delay in triage and transport accounted for many cases of all claims. This alerts us to the seriousness of medical accidents of emergency patient. This paper suggests several items that all E.M.T and every member of ED health care team always have to remember the medicolegally risk situations, must be trained in understanding the patients' wants and desires and should have the knowledge of the law associated with emergency health care. Develop the system that can share the informations about the medicolegal events which were experienced by each ED health care institutes.

• Archives of Plastic Surgery
• /
• v.43 no.3
• /
• pp.278-283
• /
• 2016

Background Disputes regarding medical malpractice occur between practitioners and patients. As patients have become increasingly aware regarding medical care, an increase in the unexpected side effects of procedures has been observed, thereby leading to an increase in disputes regarding medical malpractice. In this study, we reviewed trends in precedents involving cosmetic surgery-related medical disputes, with the goal of helping to prevent unnecessary disputes in the future. Methods We conducted a search of the judgments made in South Korean courts between 2000 and 2013 that were related to the field of plastic surgery. A total of 54 judgments were analyzed, and the selected precedents were reviewed and classified according to the kind of negligence involved. Results The claim amounts ranged from under 8 million KRW (6,991 USD) to 750 million KRW (629,995 USD). The most common ratio of the judgment amount to the claim amount was 20%-30%. The judgments were classified according to the following categories: violation of the duty of explanation in 17 cases (29%), violation of the duty of care in 10 cases (17%), violation of both duties in 20 cases (35%), and no violation of duty in six cases (10%). Conclusions Cosmetic surgery-related suits require different approaches than general malpractice suits. The Supreme Court requires plastic surgeons to determine the type, timing, methods, and scope of their treatments when considering possible results. Therefore, practitioners should be educated on their rights and responsibilities to enable them to cope with any possible medical dispute that may arise.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.12 no.2
• /
• pp.219-263
• /
• 2011

"Wrongful conception" is a medical malpractice claim in which the plaintiff is the parent of a normal, healthy infant whose conception was unplanned and unwanted. Medical malpractice in wrongful conception can be the result of a failure to provide informed consent to a patient, failure to properly perform a surgery, or a physician's negligent handling of a patient's problems. In the concrete, wrongful conception cases fall into two categories; those involving pre-conception negligence, such as a failed contraceptive, sterilization or failing of the controlling of embryo-number on the IVF, and those involving post-conception negligence, such as a failure to diagnose a pregnancy or to perform an abortion procedure. In addition, Medical malpractice can be the result of a failure to provide informed consent to a patient. When bad results occur by medical malpractice or failure to provide informed consent to a patient, the range of recovery of damages is decided by a traditional civil liability law. However the calculation of damages for wrongful conception is not easy because the high value of life is included in that case. So many courts opinions in foreign country and Seoul High Court decision in 1996 allow damages for the pregnancy, birthing process and sterilization costs, but refuses to allow damages for child rearing expenses. As to the range of recovery of damages for wrongful conception, one approach says that to allow damages in a suit such as this would mean that the physician would have to pay for the fun, joy and affection which plaintiff will have in the rearing and educating of the plaintiff's baby. To allow such damages would be against the dignity of the baby based on article 10 of the Constitution. However another approach says that damages are recoverable for all expenses related to child birth as well as for child rearing costs. Because the damages that the parents should bear a burden to the tort damage done is not a baby itself but child rearing costs. In other words, although the baby is healthy or not, economic burden of the parents can not be disregard. And denial of compensation for costs of child rearing may invalidate the role of liability law, grant the physician with a exemption certificate of liability. As a result, the medical field of procreation can be easily isolated from a liability of reparation. Therefore, on the liability law like the other medical malpractice action, parents who became pregnant or gave a birth by physician, wrongfully performed sterilization operation, etc. should be compensated for all damages relevant to unplanned and unwanted conception or birth as well as costs of child rearing.