• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.14 no.2
• /
• pp.143-172
• /
• 2013

In order to achieve the purpose of treatment for patients by a doctor, the instruction explanation obligation, which means that he should give patients the description in more details to prepare for postoperative sequelae or complications, is common with the advice explanation obligation as a doctor should ex-plain some information to patients. Since the advice explanation obligation is the benefit and protection of the law for self determination right, but the instruction explanation obligation is one for the integrity of body and life, one can be distinct from the other. Judgments giving the instruction on the concept of instruction explanation obligation, specific methods of implementation and a range of compensation for damage are recently being made by courts at all levels including the Supreme Court. It is the time to systematize them. The contents which have been mainly discussed so far include the essence of above mentioned instruction explanation obligation. However, when the tendency of practice is considered, the efforts are required to admit the organic relevance between instruction explanation obligation and advice explanation obligation and to explain the relationship without any contradiction. For whereabouts of li-ability of proof, patients theoretically demonstrate the failure to implement it. However, when the theoretical consistency is maintained, it is likely to fail the intent to recognize the instruction explanation obligation and it may ask patients to prove something impossible to be proven. Thus, these things should be considered. Moreover, as the instruction explanation obligation is associated with medicine instruction obligation of a pharmacist and the coverage is being extended, it is the time to require the systematic study on the theoretical limit.

• Korea Journal of Hospital Management
• /
• v.27 no.1
• /
• pp.11-19
• /
• 2022

Purposes: This study was to investigate intention to exercise the patient's right of self-determination on adopting the non-benefit medical services and was to identify factors associated with intention to self-determined decision. Methodology: A total of 1,000 adult respondents aged 20 to 65 years were recruited using stratified random sampling and surveyed by online. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with intention to self-determined decision using SAS 9.4(SAS Institute Inc. Cary, NC, USA). Findings: 61.9% of total participants(n=592) had intention to exercise patient's right of self-determination on adopting the non-benefit medical services. Significant differences were observed in the exercise of self-determination in relation to prior explanation and opportunity for self-determination. Practical Implications: This study suggested that explanation duty of provider might influence on increasing intention to exercise the patient's right of self-determination. Considering appropriate use of non-benefit services, it is important to enhance explanation duty of provider.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.15 no.2
• /
• pp.227-251
• /
• 2014

In current law, the premium medical treatment system gives patients the right of choice between normal medical treatment service and premium medical treatment service. Only the doctors having a career more than a certain period of time fixed in the law are eligible for providing the premium medical treatment service. So, the premium medical treatment system is highly related to the patients' right to know and the right of self-determination. The system is also relevant to the so-called 'economic explanation' notion because patients should pay additional fee when they want to use this system. Meanwhile, the situation as follows is problematic as to this system. Although a patient applied for using the premium medical treatment system and the patient also chose his or her own doctor specifically, another doctor who was not selected as premium doctor could make a medical accident. Then, is the another doctor liable for damages because the accident was a medical malpractice or a breach of medical contract? In this study, we are going to examine the problems related with the premium medical treatment system. First, we examine the current law related to the system. Second, we look into the economic explanation duty and its application to the premium medical treatment system. Finally, we examine a real judgment case about a medical practice against the premium medical treatment system and we propose our solution to this case.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.24 no.4
• /
• pp.37-63
• /
• 2023

In medical litigation, there are various cases where a doctor's 'explanation' of a patient becomes problematic. Medical explanations and guidance are required from the doctor, starting from the beginning of diagnosis, through treatment processes such as surgery, when hospitalization is necessary for treatment, during hospitalization, upon discharge, and after discharge. Furthermore, notification from the doctor or medical institution may be requested regarding the economic costs that will be incurred due to medical treatment. South Korea's judiciary has been developing legal principles regarding such doctor's explanations by distinguishing between explanations for obtaining consent for medical treatment and medical explanations related to guidance on patient treatment methods, taking into account related laws such as the stage of treatment and the Medical Service Act. Additionally, the Constitutional Court recently ruled on the non-benefit cost notification system linked to the explanation of economic costs. However, holding a doctor accountable solely because the doctor's explanation was insufficient has aspects that do not correspond to the actual situation in clinical reality, and may have a reflexive disadvantage that results in a decline in legal rights. Therefore, the doctor's explanation needs to be examined from both perspectives: guaranteeing the patient's right to self-determination and protecting his or her right to decision.

• Journal of Chest Surgery
• /
• v.54 no.1
• /
• pp.65-67
• /
• 2021

A fistula between the right pulmonary artery and the left atrium is a very rare congenital anomaly, for which there is no definitive embryogenetic explanation. Patients present with cyanosis or clubbing, and the treatment strategy is to close the fistula, which can be done by an open surgical technique or by percutaneous intervention. Although rare, this condition should be considered in the differential diagnosis when evaluating a patient with central cyanosis.

• Korean Journal of Cognitive Science
• /
• v.23 no.2
• /
• pp.185-204
• /
• 2012

A three factor experiment was conducted to explore the effects of giving prompts and asking for self explanation and the modulating effect of the need for cognition (NC) on the two interventions. The effects of giving prompts and asking for self explanation were different depending on the task and the level of need for cognition. Participants of low NC conditions showed the prompt effect and the self explanation effect in the memory tests. On the other hand, participants in the high NC conditions performed better in the comprehension test when they were given prompts and were asked to self explain. However, high NC participants performed worse when they were asked to self explain without providing the prompts. The results were interpreted to suggest the importance of detecting the right parts in getting the self explanation effect.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.14 no.2
• /
• pp.217-260
• /
• 2013

In connection to the civil liability of the medical malpractice, plaintiff and courts are solving the medical disputes with theory of the liability based on tort law. because contract law does not enact the right of claim of solatium and a plaintiff's lawyer and courts hesitate to use contract law. Medical treatment of doctor is main debt in medical contract and its in-complete performance gives rise to the violations of human's life, body and health. Consequently a breach of medical contract leads to violations of person-al rights. These violations spring from liability of contract as well as tort and damages from them are recognized based on medical contract law. A duty of explanation of doctor is a independent and appendant debt to the treatment debt. However its breach provokes violations of human's life, body and health as well as a right self-determination. Therefore consolation money claim should be recognized. In case of the violation of patient's life, body and health, patient's family al-so can demand consolation money due to the violation of their's own mental pain. However in case of the violation of only patient's self-determination without informed concent, they can not demand it by reason of the violation of patient's self-determination. But by reason of the violation of patient's life, body and health that were recognized by proximate causal relation between violation of duty of explanation and abd execution, they can do.

• Journal of the Korean Institute of Intelligent Systems
• /
• v.19 no.2
• /
• pp.218-223
• /
• 2009

This dissertation about the wrong answer note model development which is individualized investigates a problem. The method which is used from here uses a group sincerity and adds wrong answer analysis leads and to the wrong answer person explanation note of the pattern which is similar refers a wrong answer note explanation. The result which this dissertation is principal will reach to the wrong answer where is not the explanation about right answer and the process which is incorrect and a wrong answer will seek will be able to arrange. There is a possibility of finding the solution which existing wrong answer note system is improved with the method which is proposed.

• Archives of Plastic Surgery
• /
• v.36 no.3
• /
• pp.262-268
• /
• 2009

Purpose: Recently medical dispute about plastic surgery is increasing rapidly as result of growing surgery itself due to high interest in appearance and advertisement of plastic surgery. So we want to find a way to prevent similar medical accident by making better solution of plastic surgery through case analysis of medical dispute. Method: 161 cases about plastic surgery asked for aid at Korea Consumer Agency and 41 cases judged at the court was surveyed and gender, location and kind of hospital, goal and kind of operation, making operation agreement or not, kind of damage, result of process, result of lawsuit was studied from 2004.1.1. to 2006.12.31. Result: Medical doctor have to explain about symptoms of disease, method of treatment, possibility of complication, prognosis to patients before therapy so they can make decision if they take operation by doctor or not. On this survey, among the patients who underwent re - operation or had complication, 88.1%(96 from 109 cases) of them didn't get enough explanation about possibility of complication before surgery They brought lawsuit insisting they would not undergo operation if they got enough explanation about possibility of complication and result of operation before surgery. Conclusion: It is advisable that doctor must observe the duty of explanation before surgery and respect the right to decide of patient, make operation agreement and put down concrete progress note and store the pre and post operative photo to avoid medical accident. It is also needed to have guideline of therapy, Code of ethics, organization which deals with medical dispute, reconsideration of law to control that.

• Health Policy and Management
• /
• v.22 no.3
• /
• pp.315-346
• /
• 2012

The legal relationship between patient and physician is legally equal relationship. But, in times past, patients be compelled to sign an unequal contract, substantially. Because of the imbalance between supply and demand in the health care market. Today, the law of supply and demand in the health care market is running well. And as the cognition of citizens' rights grows, the relationship between patient and physician can also get a lot of changes. Patients have the right to know the information about medical care, and to decide whether or not to get treatment including invasions against their own bodies. In other words, Doctors have an obligation to explain to their patients. If doctors did not provide patients sufficient explanation or information, it violates the right of patients. This is a tort, or a breach of contract. To improve the remedy for violation of patient's right, patient is able to be protected by status as consumer. If patient is a kind of consumer in terms of medical consumption, he/she as consumer can enjoy supplementally the consumer's right. The patient as a consumer can exercise now a consumer's right as a constitutional right. In addition, with respect to consumer's rights, Framework Act on Consumers was enacted. This Act is based on constitutional provisions of Article 124 and the Act can be seen as a law that embodies consumer right because the provision of the constitutional law delegates specific contents. In the health care field, patients need to win recognition the statue of the consumer to hold the sovereignty of the consumer. In particular, if patients are consumers, they may be able to make good use of the quickly and efficiently collective dispute resolution and association lawsuit to rescue their damage, the Alternative Dispute Resolution(ADR) of Framework Act on Consumers.