• 의료법학
• /
• 제14권1호
• /
• pp.43-83
• /
• 2013

Medical treatment has great potential for conflict. Even the best-trained doctors can commit medical malpractice that result in continuing physical or mental disabilities or even death. Medical conflicts have been increasing over years. The medical conflicts between patient and medical professionals that result from medical professionals' mistakes are often fueled by a violation on the pretext of the injuries form medical malpractice and can lead to litigation. The litigation usually cost a lot of money and time. The extension of the litigation period as well as expensive cost and lack of medical knowledge placing a great burden on patients. Alternative Dispute Resolution(ADR) is more efficient than litigation. In 1988, the medical dispute mediation system has been introduces as the Act on Remedy for Damage from Medical Accident and Medical Dispute Mediation by Korean Medical Association came into effect after 23 years of enactment efforts. Medical Dispute Mediation Act(hereinafter referred to as the "MDMA") has finally entered into force from 8 April 2012. The purpose of the MDMA is to promptly and fairly redress injuries caused by medical malpractice and create a stable environment for medical services of public health or medical professionals by providing for matters regarding the mediation and arbitration of medical disputes(MDMA ${\S}1$). In an effort to secure the fair, speedy and inexpensive resolution of every malpractice case, the Korea Medical Dispute Mediation and Arbitration Agency(hereinafter referred to as the "K-MEDI") was established. Following the MDMA, the K-MEDI shall endeavor to ensure the medical dispute mediation or arbitration proceedings are conducted in a prompt, fair, and efficient manner, and patients and medical professionals shall attend proceedings in good faith with mutual trust and understanding when they participate in medical dispute mediation or arbitration proceedings.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제9권2호
• /
• pp.11-52
• /
• 2008

Based on foreign examples and past debates, the minimal conditions for passive euthanasia can be suggested as following; (1) The patient is incurable by modem medical practice and his death is impending (less than 6 months), (2) Euthanasia is practiced solely to relieve physical pain of the patient, (3) If the patient can express his will, there should be a clear and sincere request or consent, (4) More than 2 doctors including doctor in charge should consent, (5) Euthanasia should be practiced in ethical way, (6) Patient family should agree(when the patient will is assumed.) It is hard to resolve issues regarding euthanasia based on past rulings and cases without concrete law. As in United States and Germany, clear and objective provisions of euthanasia and definitive method for patient's advanced directive should be legislated to resolve medical conflict and to relieve patient and family from agony. And death with dignity debate will not be able to proceed if it is only substantively approached because of unclear definition of euthanasia and benefit comparison way of thinking. Thus it is important to establish definitive process to decided legislation of euthanasia act and resolving conflicts arising from each step of the process among interested parties exchanging medical/ethical opinions.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제23권1호
• /
• pp.149-176
• /
• 2022

우리나라 법제는 비의료인에 의한 의료행위를 엄격히 금지하고 있는데, 문신시술의 경우 의료행위로 분류되어 비의료인이 문신시술시 무면허의료행위로 처벌받게 된다. 그런데, 현실적으로 문신시술을 의료인에게 받는 경우가 매우 드물고, 문신시술을 업으로 하고 있는 비의료인들은 직업선택의 자유 침해 등을 주장하며 비의료인에 의한 문신시술의 의료행위성을 부정하고 비범죄화할 것을 요구하고 있다. 그런데 문신시술은 바늘 등을 사용하여 이루어지기 때문에 신체에 대한 침습이 있어 의료인이 행하지 않으면 보건위생상 위해가 발생할 수 있는 행위로 볼 수 있고 감염 예방 등을 위해 엄격한 관리가 필요하다. 그러나 이러한 현실적인 부분과 법제와의 괴리를 고려할 때, 보건의료적 관점에서 안전성을 고려하면서도, 사실상 의료인에 의해 행해지는 문신시술이 많지 않은 현실을 고려하여 비의료인에 의한 문신시술을 제도화하는 방안 등에 대해 전향적으로 생각을 해 볼 필요가 있다. 본고는 이러한 관점에서 문신시술이 의료행위에 해당하는지 법제를 검토하고, 보건의료적 관점에서 문제가 된다면 이를 해결하기 위한 방안을 모색하여 현실을 반영하면서도 안전성을 도모할 수 있는 대안으로 3단계로 나누어 단계화된 접근을 제시하였다.

• 한국화재소방학회논문지
• /
• 제20권4호
• /
• pp.77-90
• /
• 2006

119구급대원의 응급구급활동과 관련하여 형사법적으로 문제되는 영역은 크게 세 가지이다. 첫째는 구급 요청을 거절하는 행위이며, 둘째는 요구호자를 이송하지 않는 미이송 행위이고, 셋째는 응급처치행위이다. 이러한 일련의 구급대원의 행위들이 '응급의료에 관한 법률'이나 관련 법규의 규정에 위반되어 이루어진 경우에는 이들 법률들에 규정된 범죄행위가 성립한다. 특히 정당한 이유 없이 구급요청을 거절한 행위는 응급의료법상 응급의료거부죄가 성립하고, 적법한 절차에 의하지 아니한 응급처치는 무단 응급처치죄가 성립한다. 또한 구급요청거절과 미이송 행위 그리고 응급처치나 미응급처치 등으로 인해 요구호자가 사망하거나 상태가 악화된 경우에는 형법상 살인죄나 업무상과실치사죄 또는 중상해죄가 성립할 수 있다. 이처럼 구급대원의 경우에는 구급활동과 관련하여 형사적 책임으로부터 자유로울 수가 없다. 즉 구급대원들도 직무의 소홀과 과실로 인해 발생하는 법익침해적 결과에 대해서는 당연히 형사적 책임을 져야 한다. 그러나 긴급상황에서 불가피하게 국민의 생명과 건강을 침해한 경우에는 이들을 보호할 수 있는 법적 방안도 마련되어야 하며, 특히 열악한 근무환경에서 구급대원에게만 그 책임을 전가할 수 없는 게 현실이다. 현재 구호자보호법 제정문제가 논의되고 있는데, 이 법률에 구급대원의 형사면책부분이 합리적으로 규정되어 궁극적으로 구급대원들이 국민의 생명과 건강을 지키는 파수꾼으로서 그 역할에 충실할 수 있도록 하여야 한다.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제20권2호
• /
• pp.231-260
• /
• 2019

지난 호에 이어 2018년도 주요 의료판결을 정리하였는데, 특히 설명의무와 관련된 법원의 설시는 그 한계가 어디까지인지 알 수 없을 정도로 다기(多岐)하여 가급적 많은 판결을 소개하기 위하여 노력하였고, 손해배상의 범위와 관련하여 개호비를 다액 인정한 판결과 각서의 효력이 증가된 치료비에도 미치는 것으로 본 판결도 관심을 가져볼 필요가 있다. 진료비상계 및 공제관련 판결은 서술내용에 비하여 가장 많은 토론이 이루어졌다. 의료기관 다중 운영 사례는 중간적 판결이지만, 워낙 의료계에 관심이 많은 사건이고, 임의비급여 관련 재량권 일탈 남용이 인정된 사건도 과거에 비하여 비중이 많이 줄었지만 여전히 의미가 있다고 보았다.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제15권1호
• /
• pp.123-164
• /
• 2014

Under the new system of 'Separation of pharmaceutical prescription and dispensing' in Korea, which was implemented in 2000, physician could not dispense a medicine, and outpatient should have a physician's prescription filled at a drugstore. After pharmacist makes up outpatient's prescription, National Health Insurance Service(NHIS) pay for outpatient's medicine to pharmacist, except an outpatient's own medicine charge. And NHIS only pay for outpatient's prescription fee to physician and, physician doesn't derive profit from dispensing medicine in itself. Nevertheless, if physician writes out a prescription with violation of 'Criteria for the Medical Care Benefits', NHIS clawed back the payment of outpatient's prescription and medicine from the physician or the medical institution which the physician belongs to. In the past, NHIS's confiscation was in accordance with 'the National Health Care Insurance Act, Article 52, Clause 1'. But, since 2006 when the Supreme Court declared that there was no legal basis on the NHIS's confiscation of outpatient's medicine payment, NHIS had put in a claim for illegal prescriptions on the basis 'the Korean Civil law, Article 750(tort)'. So, Many medical institutions filed civil actions against NHIS. The key point of this actions was whether the issuing outpatient prescriptions with violations of Criteria for the Medical Care Benefits constitute of the law of tort. On this point, the first trial and the second trial took different position. Finally the Supreme Court acknowledged the constitution of the law of tort in 2013. In this paper, the author will review critically the decision of the Supreme Court, and consider the relativeness between the legal effect of Criteria for the Medical Care Benefits and the constitution of the issuing outpatient prescriptions with violations of Criteria for the Medical Care Benefits as the law of tort.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제8권1호
• /
• pp.137-177
• /
• 2007

The medical expenses review system in Korea has developed under fee-for-service system with its own unique structure. The importance of reviewing medical expenses has been emphasized, as the size of medical expenditures moving through the health insurance legal context and its weight in the national economy have increased very rapidly. It is, however, analyzed that the feuds and arguments continue among the stakeholders for the lack of laws supporting the medical expenses review system. The medical expenses review is a series of administrative procedures, deciding whether claims from medical care institutions to the insurer are legal and valid or not. It mainly controls the increase of unnecessarily excessive health insurance claim and prevents fraudulent claim and abuse and checks the less use or unsuitable use of medical resources. It also works a function guarantees medical benefits for the appropriate treatment according to the object of health insurance system as a social insurance scheme. The dispute on legal base of the medical expenses review is about the source of law in the medical expenses review. There are the Health Insurance Act and administrative laws as jus scriptum and the guidelines of review as administrative orders. The medical expenses review should reflect various factors, such as the development of medical healthcare technologies, the health expenditures distribution, the financial situation of the health insurance, and the evaluation on the level of appropriate benefits. It is also likely to adapt to the traits of characters of medicine, and trends and transition, Besides it should judge the legality and the validity of medical benefits expenditures by synthesizing these all factors. And the evaluation system of appropriateness of medical benefits was administrative procedure which was consecutive with reviewing the medical expenses system and it was intended to make up for the result of reviewing the medical expenses in more comprehensive levels.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제10권2호
• /
• pp.203-249
• /
• 2009

It is the so-called Shinchon Severance Hospital Case brought to an end by the decision of the Supreme Court that opened the real discourse of withholding or withdrawing of LST (Life-Sustaining Treatment) in the legal profession as well as medical profession in Korea. Everyone has sympathy with the validity and necessity of legal regulation on withdrawing-including withholding-of LST save the requirements & procedure of withdrawing of LST. In this situation, the legislative bill of amendment to the Korean Civil Law introducing of adult guardianship was pre-announced by the Ministry of Justice on September 18th 2009. The adult guardianship is a guardianship system that supports an mentally handicapped adult to deal with his affairs by support of a guardian. The object of adult guardianship includes affairs of body or well-being as well as property of adult wards. In particular, affairs of medical matters are of importance in the duty and authority of adult guardians. So, the introduction of adult guardianship is of much importance de lege lata as well as de lege ferena in the discussion of withdrawing of LST as a medical treatment. Since the legislation on withdrawing of LST intents to protect the right of death with dignity on the basis of patients' autonomy, the ratio legis of withdrawing of LST is variant from that of adult guardianship. In this context, it seems reasonable to legislate the withdrawing of LST separately from the adultguardianship. In the meantime, the adult guardianship of the legislative bill of amendment to the Korean Civil Law is related to the withdrawing of LST, since the main purpose of adult guardianship is to protect patients' quality of lives and to regulate guardianship contracts based on patients' autonomy. In that context, it seems reasonable to incorporate the legislation of withdrawing of LST into the adult guardianship system. In the latter case, it is not easy to adopt the withdrawing of LST into the legislative bill of the Korean Civil Law for the bill is pre-announced already as previously stated. However, the legislation of withdrawing of LST is not inferior to the legislation of adult guardianship as a matter of urgency. Moreover, it is likely that the legislative bill of Amendment to the Korean Civil Law generates discrepancies in interpretation of the requirements & procedure of withdrawing of LST as the amended German Civil Law did. In short, it is desirable for the legislator to revise the legislative bill despite delay.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제21권3호
• /
• pp.3-33
• /
• 2020

'원격의료(telemedicine)'란 '의료인이 정보통신기술을 이용하여 원격으로 실시하는 의료행위'라고 정의할 수 있다. 지금까지 우리나라의 통설은 의료법 제34조를 근거로 의료인 간의 원격자문만 허용되고, 의료인과 환자 간의 원격의료는 금지되는 것으로 이해하였다. 그러나, 의료법 제34조는 의료업 수행에 대한 장소적 제한 규정일 뿐, 원격의료 자체를 금지하는 규정은 아니다. 그 외 현행 의료법에는 원격의료를 금지하는 규정이 존재하지 않는다. 건강보험 요양급여기준과 별개로 현행 의료법 해석상 원격의료가 일반적으로 금지된다고 보기는 어렵다. 다만, 의료법 제17조와 제17조의2에서의 '직접 진찰'의 의미와 관련해서 해석상 논란이 있다. 헌법재판소는 이를 '대면 진찰'로 해석한 반면, 대법원은 '스스로 진찰'로 해석하였다. '직접'의 사전적 의미와 관련 의료법 규정에 대한 해석 등에 비추어 볼 때, 대법원의 해석이 타당하다고 생각한다. '직접 진찰'이 '대면 진찰'을 의미하지는 않더라도, '진찰'의 개념 안에 '대면진찰의 원칙'이 내포되어 있고 '비대면 진찰'은 대면진찰을 보완하는 수준에서만 허용되기 때문에 비대면진찰로 인한 문제점은 충분히 극복할 수 있다고 본다. 결국은 진찰이 얼마나 충실하였느냐, 즉 '진찰의 충실성' 여부가 원격진료 허용의 한계라고 할 수 있다.

• 대한예방한의학회지
• /
• 제21권2호
• /
• pp.45-53
• /
• 2017

Background and Aim : Lately the age of competition has come among the medical service area. At the same time disputes over the medical practice related to the medical person's territory tend to increase. In part it is due to the increased medical persons but in part it is because the medical practice is not defined clearly in the Medical Service Act for the practice of each medical person. So the legal definition of medical practice will be discussed here. Materials and Method : The cases from the court have been confirmed the difference between the two medical persons regarding the actual events. Legal aspects of medical practice in Korean medicine and the related cases will be reviewed and analysed. Results : The form of medical practice consists of administrating Korean medicine treatment and providing guidance for health based on Korean medicine. For medical doctors the practice includes medical treatment and guidance for health. Circular definition in the Medical Service Act over the medical practice, medical person and medical instruments makes it difficult to understand the whole idea. Therefore, the court has a tendency to decide the medical practice of medical doctor of Korean medicine from the some reliable points which is: 1) it is based on the principle of traditional Korean Medicine, 2) it is practiced by the medical doctor of Korean Medicine, 3) it can do harm to the patient without proper involvement of the medical doctor of Korean Medicine. Now the Act on the promotion of Korean Medicine and Pharmaceuticals makes it include the concept of "scientifically applied and developed" medical practice of Korean Medicine. Conclusions : With the essential change in the Act on the promotion of Korean Medicine and Pharmaceuticals, it is expected that even slight change can be seen in the court cases. However, still the concept of medical practice in the Medical Service Act remains the same. Modernisation of Korean Medicine, enhancement of textbooks and clinical practice training and the effort to amend the law to clearly define the medical practice of Korean Medicine will contribute to the clinical and academic environment. Evidence based Korean Medicine and even the unification of east-west medicine could be considered for the situation.