• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.10 no.2
• /
• pp.287-307
• /
• 2009

A person is injured in car accident caused by his/her slight negligence except he / she causes accident by his / her willfulness or gross negligence. Because the National Health Insurance Corporation (hereinafter called "Corporation") shall not provide any insurance benefit "when he has intentionally or through gross negligence caused a criminal conduct or intentionally contributed to the occurrence of an accident" referred to in Article 48 (1) 1 of the National Health Insurance Act. So, if he / she is insured by his / her own bodily injury coverage, he / she can be compensated for his / her medical expenses. The injured have the rights to file either National Health Insurance claim and Automobile Insurance claim but there is no clear and definite adjustment clause. The claim disputes between National Health Insurance (hereinafter called "NHI") and Automobile Insurance (hereinafter called "AI") in the own bodily injury coverage makes some problems. Firstly, there are some differences in co-payments which he / she chooses between NHI and AI. Profit per a patient is higher in the NHI than in the AI. Secondly, it can provoke criticism that people shall unnecessarily pay double contributions. Lastly, it can raise moral hazards. For example, if he / she can cover the compensations when the insured receives the compensations from his / her insurer, the Corporation can be claimed by medical care institution payment of the health care benefit costs. In conclusion, first of all, to improve the national health and preserve the insured's rights the Corporation shall keep notice these facts.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.19 no.2
• /
• pp.3-40
• /
• 2018

Conventionally, there were few cases in which a medical accident became a criminal case in Japan. However, after the serious malpractice such as the Yokohama City University Hospital case, prosecutors came to be less hesitant to prosecute a malpractice. In a medical accident, the attribution of the responsibilities among medical personnel becomes one important element of the proof of negligence. The Supreme Court concluded that, when the attribution of the responsibilities is not established among medical personnel to confirm the identity of the patient like the Yokohama City University Hospital case, all the personnel who were involved bear the responsibilities to identify the patient. For serious cases which requireut most carefulness fortreatment such as the Saitama Medical University Hospital case, not only the chief physician in charge of the case concerned but also the director of the branch at the university hospital bear the responsibilities to confirm the treatment policy of the case. After the acquittal of the Ohno Hospital case, the voice demanding more prudent prosecution of malpractices has become stronger than before. Meanwhile, Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare introduced Medical Accidents Investigation System for the prevention of medical accident and, has reinforced the third party inspection of medical accidents.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.10 no.1
• /
• pp.323-361
• /
• 2009

In Korea, Abortion in the Criminal Law is an illegal act in exception of on which abortion may be carried out through the grounds are very limited and related such a emergency situation of women's physical health, rape, incest and genetic diseases. The Criminal Law regulates the mother's act of abortion and the doctor's surgical performance of abortion. The Mother and the Child Health Law prescribes the medical, ethical, and genetic grounds for the legal permission of abortion. Many people tend to abuse of abortion even though they are fully aware of its illegality. The law lead to be inconsistent with its enforcement. In this paper, I would like to suggest some proposals about the legal analysis of the Abortion Regulations th reform the existing regulation and increase th effectiveness of the regulations. Recently, in a case of the a maternity hospital where a midwife left alone a diabetes pregnancy women who had a baby, and the overweight baby(5.2Kg) died in the uterus due to hypoxic states. Supreme Court of Korea 2007.6.29. 2005do3832) had given a verdict of "not guilty". It looked like there were very fair with current crime law. But, we want this case to be investigated if there weren't any logical contradictions as well as concurrent translation within Constitution Law. Now the Mother and the Child Health Law prescribes the medical, ethical, and genetic grounds for the legal permission of abortion. But this law does not include social and economic grounds.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.19 no.1
• /
• pp.113-142
• /
• 2018

In recent years, there have been opinions in which physicians are liable to the revocation of their medical license if they are sentenced to above a certain level for criminal charges regardless of the types of offenses. Accordingly, a revised bill of law was submitted in the National Assembly, and related discussions are thus expected to commence. Considering the morality and ethics or the level of the rule of law that the general public expects of physicians, as well as the license revocation system in other professional sectors, it is assessed that medical license revocation due to criminal convictions of physicians is appropriate to some degree. However, if a poorly devised system is established based on unrefined inferences or emotional judgements, unexpected side-effects are likely to arise. With regard to serious criminal acts that society generally perceives as unacceptable, it can be assessed that the revocation of physicians' licenses would appropriately protect the general public from threats. However, given the life-saving characteristics of high-risk medical practices, higher malpractice exposures, and social values, it is difficult to assess charges of professional negligence resulting in death(or in injury) and minor offences in the same manner as anti-social criminal offences are handled. Physicians need to be treated the same as any other professions. At the same time, they are engaged in administering medical treatment to patients in the face of great risks as professionals. Under the circumstances, a discussion on the introduction of a more specific and empirical system is needed by considering the intrinsic characteristics of medical treatment and the need for an equitable health and medical policy. Accordingly, based on the above judgment and perception, this study explores the code of ethics for physicians and medical license revocation related to criminal offences at home and abroad, and examines various legislative alternatives appropriate for the Republic of Korea. In doing so, the purpose of the study is to contribute to the development of a reasonable system for handling criminal offences by physicians.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.9 no.1
• /
• pp.197-257
• /
• 2008

Current crown law punishes crime related to unborn child with abortion crime. So we might think that any infringement on unborn child is pretty well protected. But, in terms of illegal abortion, a charge of injuring person and homicide, there are lots blind spots in punishing criminals. Especially, there are numerous unclear cases in illegal abortion. If a doctor killed an unborn child by accident in medical operations, we can't punish him because it was an accident. There still exist controversial cases such as, if an unborn child was somehow damaged and was dead after birth, or was born with disabilities, how are we supposed to punish that? Recently, in a case where a doctor left alone a mother who had a baby and the baby died, our Supreme Court of Korea (Supreme Court of Korea 2007.6.29 2005do 3832) had given a verdict of "not guilty". It looked like they were very fair with current crime law. But, we want this case to be investigated if there weren't any logical contradictions as well as concurrent translation within Constitution Law.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.16 no.2
• /
• pp.3-26
• /
• 2015

Recently, Practicing of ghost surgery and duty of informed consent of doctors have become a big issue in the medical dispute and lawsuits. The ground of admitting the informed consent and the agreement(self-determination of patients) can be based on the dignity of man and the right to pursue his happiness guaranteed under Article 10 of the constitution in theory. However there are no explicit legal regulations on the duty of the informed consent and there is no substantive legal enactment on the informed consent, but there is a collision between self-determination of patients and the discretionary power of doctors. If the discretionary power on the duty of the informed consent was extended it may result in the infringement of the right of surgical patients, so called arbitrary medical treatment. Relating to this issue, New Jersey Supreme Court held that a patient has the right to determine not only whether surgery is to be performed on him, but also who shall perform it. Moreover it held that a surgeon who operates without the patient's consent engages in the unauthorized touching of another and, thus, commits a battery'. But there are no ghost surgery cases adopting battery theory in Korea, and professional negligence has been considered rather than the battery, regarding an absence of hostile intent to injure patient. Supreme Court of Korea held that a doctor who operates a medical procedure without the patient's valid prior consent based on wrong diagnosis commits professional negligence resulting in injury, and the patient's invalid consent do not preclude wrongfulness'. However, if a health care provider conducts a completely non-consensual treatment or substitute surgeon without consent, the action should be plead in battery, not negligence, but if a health care provider violate his duty of care in obtaining the consent of the patient by failing to disclosure all relevant information (risks) that a reasonable person would deem significant in making a decision to have the procedure, the action should be plead in negligence, not battery. Therefore, the scope of patients' self-determination can be protected by stating clearly the scope of the duty of the informed consent and the exemption of the informed consent legislatively, it is considered that it is valid to legislate the limitation of the discretionary power.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.11 no.2
• /
• pp.149-179
• /
• 2010

In November 2007, the Korean Constiutional Court held that a joint penal provision in which the individual employer is punished when his or her employee is determined to have committed a crime was unconstitutional, because the joint penal provision had no contents for the culpability of an individual employer and thus violated the constitutionally protected principle of culpability. After the Korean Constitutional Court's judgment, since December 2008 the Ministry of Justice began to change the old joint penal provision into the new revised joint penal provision. On January 2010, the old joint penal provisions of 110 laws were revised. The new revised joint penal provision adds only an additional sentence: "If a juristic person, an entity or an individual perform due care and supervision over its employee for the prevention of such a crime, it will be exempted from the punishment". But an presumption of negligence clause that is added in the new revised joint penal provision is still vacuum in concerned with supervision responsibility. Probably the new form of penal provision, that is understood to be a kind of the presumption of negligence, could let the burden of proof be changed from the public prosecutor to the accused, in other words employer-side. Especially, when joint penal provision is applied to hospital as administrative punishment, according to the hospital is a (juridical) foundation or not, the application of the joint penal provision is different and unfaithful. In my opinion, therefore, a corporation liability could be considered according to various liability of employee's business and the crime its employee committed because of an organizational failure of the corporation.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.26 no.4
• /
• pp.129-149
• /
• 2016

Medical dispute means the dispute between the hospital and the patient due to a medical accident. In general, medical accidents must be in accordance with the terms that are used in the medical dispute adjustment method stated in Article 2 (definition). In relation to this, there is a need to discuss an efficient operation scheme for Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in medical disputes. In addition, it is necessary to look at issues of civil liability and criminal liability. In particular, in the consumer dispute arbitration committee, there is a case to make a "decision not to adjust" in aggressive intervention in the process of conflict resolution. The medical staff, on the basis of its "decision," can use this as a proven material for civil and criminal cases. This is rather upon the determination of the consumer council as a typical side effect to defend the user's perspective. This is the "decision" as was expressed from an order, "not adjusted." It is also determined to be easy and clearly timely. In the medical litigation, it is requesting the burden of proof of a patient's cause-and-effect relationship with the doctors committing negligence and medical malpractice. This seems to require the promotion of legislation in the direction to reduce future cases. It is determined that the burden of proof of medical accidents must be improved. The institution receiving the medical accident should prevent a closure report. Further, it is necessary to limit the transition to a franchise point. In this paper, we understand the problems of the current medical dispute resolution system, trying to establish a medical dispute resolution system desirable through an efficient alternative. In addition, it wants help in the protection and realization in medical consumers' and patients' rights. The relevant authorities will take advantage of these measures. After all, this could contribute to the system for a smooth resolution of a medical dispute.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.17 no.2
• /
• pp.3-28
• /
• 2016

While product liability has been settled as a technical term in civil law, criminal law does not commonly accept technical term for it. Not like civil law, product liability in criminal law point outs individual responsibility and disability of normative order. Meaning that causation between individual's action of violation of duty and the result of danger of legal interest or infringement of legal interest must be proved. In criminal law excluding "non-result-constituted crimes (Unternehmensdelikt)", charge of injuring, accidental infliction of injury, homicide or involuntary manslaughter is problematic in product liability. Of course, it is necessary to distinguish whether the action related to the outcome is act or ommission. Also the causal relationship between the action and the result must be proved, and the intention or negligence should be recognized. In this paper, it analyzes cases that were problematic in Korea, Germany, Spain, etc. Mainly focusing on the problems revealed in the determination of causal relationship, especially recognizing criminal liability related to products. Furthermore it is followed by the view of reviewing the cause-and-effect relationship by 2 steps, dividing natural scientific causation and the normative causal relationship. In this process, to acknowledge criminal product liability in accordance with recognizing cause-and-effect relationship, there should be general risk of specific substance causing the outcome. This only premise can be meaningful to examine the casual relationship from specific cases. As it shows in some cases and theories, it is not contradicting general law of cause and effect by determining specific causal relationship by free evaluation of evidence if a general causal relationship does not exist. Also since judge's testimony does not hold a dominant position from rule of thumb, it is possible to recognize specific causal relationship. However this paper takes position that if there is no objective and reasonably undeniable cause and effect law. If there is no objective and reasonably undeniable causal law, which is the premise for recognizing concrete causal relations, judge should sentence guilty according to "in dubio pro reo" principle. In addition, it is not allowed for the defendant to burden unproven fact by free evaluation of evidence which has an effect of shift of burden of proof.

• Journal of Venture Innovation
• /
• v.4 no.3
• /
• pp.141-150
• /
• 2021

Although management decisions centered on the board of directors and directors must be made in order to effectively promote ESG management, the company's management is not obligated to make decisions considering ESG factors. A Korean corporation(company) is an established organization for commercial or other profit, and the purpose of treating a legal organization as a corporation is to easily handle the legal relationship of a group (corporate's property) and individual property of a group member, but legal person such as rights to "harm public rights" or "defend fraud". Criminal liability for illegal acts of a corporation, but the liability of a corporation (natural person) for illegal acts of a corporation is recognized within a limited range, but the criminal liability of a corporation (natural person) is limited. As the social responsibility of a corporation is great, limiting the responsibility of a corporation-related person (natural person) to civil responsibility will halve its effectiveness if considering the impact on the corporation's national economy. Objective requirements such as the completeness of control, hybridization of property, infringement of creditors' rights, and small-capitalization, and the subjective intention of abusing the company system to avoid legal application to controlling shareholders should be denied. Despite the increasing influence on corporate society, such as large-scale projects and astronomical business profits, corporate officials (natural persons) are forced to be held liable for negligence and intentional liability within a limited range. In such cases, it is necessary to introduce criminal responsibility separately from civil responsibility to legal persons (natural persons) in consideration of the maturity of capitalism in Korean society and the economic status of the world. In Korea, the requirements for recognition of corporate denial are strict, but the United States says that it is sufficient to have control or fraud. Therefore, it is not about civil responsibility, but about criminal responsibility of a legal person (natural person), so if fraud is recognized, it can strengthen the corporate social responsibility.