• 의료법학
• /
• 제17권2호
• /
• pp.57-81
• /
• 2016

환자가 의사를 상대로 의료사고에 대한 민사책임을 추궁하기 위하여 소송을 제기하게 될 때, 의사의 의료과실과 환자에게 발생한 손해 사이에 인과관계가 존재하는지 여부는 소송의 승패를 좌우한다. 의료과실소송에서는 의료가 지니는 특수성으로 인하여 다른 민사사건과 달리 인과관계의 존부의 판단이 쉽지 않다. 또한 의료과실소송에서는 진료기록을 비롯한 정보가 의사에게 집중되어 있고, 환자의 의료지식은 의사에 비하여 상대적으로 부족하다. 따라서 원고인 환자가 부담하는 인과관계에 관한 증명책임의 완화가 판례를 통하여 인정되고 있다. 이에 본고에서는 우리나라에서 의료민사책임에서 인과관계를 어떻게 인정하는지에 관한 법리를 살펴보고자 한다. 그리고 우리나라 판례의 태도를 인과관계가 문제되는 유형별 - 일반적 의료행위의 경우, 설명의무의 경우, 의료과실과의 인과관계가 없는 경우 - 로 나누어 고찰하기로 한다.

• 한방안이비인후피부과학회지
• /
• 제25권3호
• /
• 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.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제8권2호
• /
• pp.195-204
• /
• 2007

It is a general principle that the plaintiff takes burden of proof about negligence and causation in a civil compensation litigation. And it is the same in a medical malpractice lawsuit. Korean courts have made diverse efforts to mitigate the plaintiff's duty to prove in medical malpractice lawsuits under the name of justice and impartiality. One of those theoretical attempt is 'presumption of causation'. The Supreme Court, since 1995, has developed a new logic for the theory of 'presumption of causation' which is characterized by a phrase "layman's common sense". The Court presumes the defendant's negligence and causation when the plaintiff alleges and proves the facts which can be pointed out and expressed by a layman with common sense. And if the defendant fails to prove that the result was caused by other fact than own medical activities, the defendant shall be defeated. I realize that this theory has problem for justice and impartiality. I would say that two fators should be considered and added to this logic. First,are defendant's acts generally belonging to gross negligence which would cause that kind of bad result? Second, is it recognized that there would be the causation generally and statistically between the cause and the result?

• 의료법학
• /
• 제13권2호
• /
• pp.309-334
• /
• 2012

Although the number of foreign patients visiting Korea for medical treatments or plastic surgery is rapidly increasing, countermeasures against unforeseen medical disputes involving foreign patients are adequate. To date, the record shows that most foreign patients have visited doctors at the departments of family medicine, internal medicine, dermatology (incl. plastic surgery), and healthcare centers, which, fortunately, indicates that there are not many severe, high risk patients. However, if the current growth rate continues to rise and the number of foreign patients visiting each department continues to grow, more diverse medical practices will be likely to take place in the future, and consequently, it is expected that the possibilities of medical malpractice and the costs of dispute resolution will also rise dramatically. When a medical dispute occurs, in general, a lawsuit is ultimately settled by the court. However, since this can damage the creditworthiness of medical institutions and also incur significant litigation costs, which is a typical characteristic of a medical lawsuit, medical professionals or institutions will be heavily burdened. Furthermore, an adequate policy or countermeasure against a medical dispute with a foreign patient has not yet been established, and it would be difficult to resolve a dispute by finding the middle ground, due to relative standards and policies between countries. Now, we need to improve the existing policies and prepare for countermeasures that will allow us to precisely predict the nature of such disputes, which have been increasing, and resolve them peacefully. Based on such knowledge, this study aims to establish countermeasures against medical disputes with foreign patients, and examine ways to promptly and reasonably resolve them at an early stage.

• 한국병원경영학회지
• /
• 제11권1호
• /
• pp.1-30
• /
• 2006

According to the available data, in these days, the number of medical accidents and disputes have significantly increased since 1990 in Korea. From this aspect, a variety of approaches and efforts to solve these problems is needed before it is too late. This study intended to identify the thoughts of patients who are directly connected with medical accidents and disputes and then to consider reasonable settlement methods of the increasing disputes. For achieving the purpose of this study, the self-administerd questionnaire was conducted with 450 out-patients who visited three university hospitals, five small and medium-sized hospitals, and ten clinics in Seoul from June 13 to 17, 2005. Incomplete questionnaires were omitted and 410 respondents(91%) were included for the analysis of this study. Each section of the survey was composed of six categories such as the recognition of malpractice, a compensation system about no-fault medical accidents, the recognition of the judgement of medical accidents in court, reasonable settlement of medical accidents, reasons of lawsuit, and the need of the medical dispute settlement organization. The major results of this study were as follows. First, more than half of the respondents, 51.9 percent, worry about malpractice. And many respondents think malpractice causes their symptoms to persist or become worse, and also some respondents think that the doctor's prescription changed too frequently. Second, as for a compensation system about no-fault medical accident, 55.7 percent of the respondents insist that a proper compensation for suffering patients or their families should be provided. And also as for the responsibility of compensation, respondents think joint compensation of both the medical institution and the government is needed foremost, followed by the medical insurance company and finally by the medical institution. The government as well as the related institutions should take responsibility for malpractice accidents for which the doctor is not responsible. Third, as for the acknowledgment of medical accident judgements by the court, 32.8 percent of respondents think that it is best to compromise with a medical institution, followed by lawsuit(26.2%), the assistance of civil organization(23.2%), and a powerful physical protest(7.6%). Fourth, as for the lawsuit of medical accidents, 62.9 percent of respondents think that patients and their families would be in a disadvantageous position in relation to medical institutions and doctors mentioning the lack of professional medical and lawful knowledge, experience and know-how as the reason. So many people have given up appeals owing to the difficulties involved in defending themselves through evidence. Fifth, about a half share of the respondents indicated that the medical institution's neglect of the responsibility of medical accidents is one of the most important reasons of lawsuit. And next respondents mentioned the lack of the medical dispute settlement organization and a general distrust of medical institutions and doctors. Sixth, a majority of respondents consented to the introduction of the need of the medical dispute settlement organization, And about a half of the respondents mentioned a readiness to accept the mediation of the organization, but the rest did not express a clear opinion. It seems that conflict among the parties concerned have existed in relation to the medical dispute settlement organization and related legislation for many years. But as this study has shown, the needs of the medical dispute settlement organization is in desperate demand. Therefore, more negotiation efforts from all interest groups should be considered for the birth of the medical dispute settlement organization and related legislation.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제9권2호
• /
• pp.209-229
• /
• 2008

When we are totalizing the lawsrelated to the medical, as the Laboratory medical testing is a kind of the medical act, it is the regulation that the medical technologist can analyze the specimen using in vitro diagnostic devices and diagnosticdrugs under the guidance of doctor or dentist from a corresponding medical institution and can report through verification and interpretation. However, in real medical fields, 'the guidance of doctor' is seriously in-sufficient or even the person who is not the medical technologist is executing. Furthermore the cases that produce inspection results with devices or reagents which are not validated nor approved have been frequently occurred. The result of Laboratory medical testing derived from this procedure can become the important information for the disease control of a country, and also can be decisive to the definite diagnosis and the prognostic monitoring about the patient disease. In spite of its significant medical act to be applicable to an unique proof with the related expert appraisal result in the medical mal-practice lawsuit, our reality in which the quality control is not properly working due by the costs and the labor shortage related to the Laboratory medical testing is quietly in bad condition. Even from now, the government should recognize the significance of the Laboratory medical testing and must achieve more strict administrative management as well as the law maintenance.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제9권2호
• /
• pp.181-207
• /
• 2008

With recent emphasis on evidence based medicine, clinical practice guidelines are seen as a potential mechanism by which unify various managerial and professional approaches to improving the quality of care. The development process of guidelines has been the subject of much research. and it is need translating the medical evidence of research into a clinical practice guidelines. the gathered evidence needs to be interpreted into a clinical, public health, policy, or payment context. The term 'clinical practice guidelines' can evoke a diverse range of responses from healthcare personnel. Clinical practice guidelines are increasingly used in patient management but some clinicians are not familiar with their origin or appropriate applications. Understanding the limitations as well as benefits of CPG could enable clinicians to have clearer view of the place of guidelines in every practice. In the context of increasing complaints and litigation in healthcare, the legal implications of clinical practice guidelines are of increasing importance. Clinical practice guidelines could, in theory, influence the manner in which the courts establish negligence by suggesting the doctor breached the duty of care by failing to provide the required standard of medical care. In several studies, the CPGs were relevent to and played a pivotal role in the proof of negligence. Much depends on the quality of guidelines and the tools developed and the authoritativeness of a guideline. Recently, there are several opinions the court also should review the validity and reliability of expert testimony including medical evidence. and widespread use of guidelines in malpractice lawsuit could lead the physicians to greater compliance with guidelines in the long term. In conclusion, Health care reformers, physicians as well as guidelines developers should understand that guidelines have both medical and legal aspects as a double-edges sword. so clinicians, legal representatives and decision-makers should not defer unduly to guidelines.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제19권1호
• /
• pp.143-163
• /
• 2018

임플란트 시술은 소위 상업화된 의료에 속하고 상대적으로 시술자체가 단순 명료하며 그 시술이 성공가능성은 거의 100%에 달한다. 또한 환자에게 건강을 위한 불가피한 수단이기 보다는 선택적 수단의 의미를 지니는바 자기결정권의 보호를 위한 설명의무의 중요성이 특히 강조되기도 한다. 이러한 특성에 비추어 임플란트 시술 계약에 대하여는 도급의 성격이 강조되어 경우에 따라서는 식립 자체의 실패만으로도 의사의 과실이 존재한다고 할 수 있을 것이다. 또한 임플란트 시술은 상업화된 의료로서 단순 명료한 의료행위인바 과실여부는 직업적 평균인이 아닌 일반인의 상식을 기준으로 판단되어야 할 것이므로, 임플란트 시술 후 악결과가 발생한 환자는 예를 들어, 시술 중 과도한 통증과 출혈이 발생하였음에도 의사가 별 다른 조치를 취하지 않았다는 등을 입증하면 충분하고 그 전문가의 입장에서 의료행위가 적절치 못하였다는 점까지 밝혀야 하는 것은 아니다. 한편, 임플란트 의료과오 판결들을 살펴보건대 법원은 명시적으로 임플란트 시술계약을 도급이라고 판단하고 있지는 않더라도, 식립 자체의 성공여부로 의사의 과실을 판단하고 있어 일의 완성을 목적으로 하는 도급계약과 유사한 특성을 어느 정도 인정하는 듯 보인다. 또한 제시하고 있는 의료과실의 구체적 내용들에 비추어 의료과실의 판단도 일반인의 상식에 기초한 것으로 보인다.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제22권2호
• /
• pp.49-79
• /
• 2021

피고의 잘못된 임플란트 시술로 인하여 원고는 임플란트 보철물 도재 파절 및 역미소선, 치주염 등의 심각한 손상을 입은 사건에서 피고는 원고에게 불법행위 또는 채무불이행으로 인한 손해배상으로 향후 치료비와 위자료를 지급하라는 판결이 나왔다. 이번 대상판결에서는 치과치료에 관한 사안으로서 일반적인 의료과오소송과 마찬가지로 고도의 전문적 지식을 필요로 하는 분야로서 비전문가인 일반인으로서는 치과의사가 의료행위 과정에서 주의의무 위반이 있었는지 여부나 환자에게 발생한 손해 사이의 인과관계가 있었는지 여부를 밝혀내기 극히 어려우므로 증명책임을 경감하는 것으로 구성한 것이다. 대상판결의 사안에서처럼 수술 도중이나 수술 후에 환자에게 중한 결과의 원인이 된 증상이 발생한 경우에 그 증상의 발생에 관하여 의료상의 과실 이외의 다른 원인이 있다고 보기 어려운 간접사실들이 증명된 경우에는 그와 같은 증상이 의료상의 과실에 기한 것이라고 추정할 수 있다고 판시하였다. 특히 대상판결에서는 일반적인 수술적 치료의 사안이 아닌 임플란트의 시술의 사례로서 수단채무로서 치과진료의 의료과오소송에서 치과의사의 과실에 관한 환자의 입증책임을 소위 '사실상 추정론'에 근거하여 대폭 경감함으로써 의료기술의 발달과 증가하는 현대 의료과오소송에서 세계적 입법추세인 입증책임의 전환에 더욱 가까이 접근하였다는 점에서 큰 의미를 부여할 수 있다. 이러한 점은 대상판결에서 치과의사의 '과실'의 판단에 있어 "그 증상이나 발생에 관하여 의료상의 과실 이외의 다른 원인이 있다고 보기 어려운 간접사실이 증명되면 그와 같은 증상이 의료상의 과실에 기한 것이라고 추정할 수 있다"고 판시한 점에서 명확히 확인된다.

• Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
• /
• 제61권4호
• /
• pp.474-477
• /
• 2018

Objective : From November 30, 2016, the Korean Government carried the revised Medical Dispute Mediation and Arbitration Act into effect. Mediation will start automatically without agreements of the defendant, when the outcome of the patient was death, coma more than a month or severe disability. Cerebral aneurysm has a definite risk of bad outcome, especially in the worst condition. Any surgical intervention to this lesion has its own high risk of complications. Recently, Seoul central district court decided 50% responsibility of the doctors who made a rupture of the aneurysm during coiling (2015Ga-Dan5243104). We reviewed judicial precedents related to cerebral aneurysms in lawsuit using a web search. Methods : We searched judicial precedents at a web search of the Supreme Court, using the key words, "cerebral aneurysm". Results : There were 15 precedents, six from the Supreme Court, seven from the High Court, and two from district courts. Seven precedents were related to the causation analysis, such as work-relationship. Five precedents were malpractice suits related bad results or complications. Remaining three precedents were related to the insurance payment. In five malpractice precedents, two precedents of the Supreme Court reversed former two precedents of the High Court. Conclusion : Judicial precedents on the cerebral aneurysm included not only malpractice suits, but also causation analysis or insurance payment. Attention to these subjects is needed. We also need education of the independent medical examination. To avoid medical disputes, shared decision making seems to be useful, especially in cases of high risk condition or procedures.