• 한국항공운항학회지
• /
• 제13권2호
• /
• pp.48-62
• /
• 2005

In aviation criminal law is negligence different from in civil law and in general criminal law. The Interpretation of aviation criminal negligence must be elucidated in characteristic own way. The thesis considers the principle of trust, permissible risk and the accomplice offender.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제7권2호
• /
• pp.179-218
• /
• 2006

To succeed the claim of medical negligence, the plaintiff should establish the medical profession's fault, and the causation between the fault and damages. The faults are judged on lege artis, which is based on expert witness. However, judges often infer the faults and causations from circumstantial evidences and patients' injuries. This presumptions depend on the law of nature(Erfahrungsgesetz). The law of nature can explain the typical development of the event. If the circumstantial evidences were in accordance with that, the faults and causations would be able to be recognized by the judges. Therefore the standards of comparison such as lege artis or the law of nature play an important role for medical negligence liabilities to be imputed to doctors or hospitals. The factual elements necessary to assume the fault is similar to those of the causation, for the concept of the fault is correlated with that of the causation. The elements include the temporal and spatial proximity between damages and defendant's medical treatments, no existence of other causations, the probability of bed results developed by the medical treatments, and so on. These enable the fault and causation to be assumed at the same times.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제9권1호
• /
• pp.57-127
• /
• 2008

In medical malpractice lawsuits, negligence is generally defined as conduct that is culpable because it falls short of what a reasonable person would do to protect another individual from a foreseeable risks of harm. Thus, the essence of negligence is a breach of obligations to be attentive, and the breach of obligations to be is negligence. However, whether negligence is or not depends on time, place, litigation forms and the judge since the meaning of negligence is wavering on the basis of abstract and normative judgment. In this thesis, what is medical negligence, a breach of obligations of attention for a doctor in medical malpractice lawsuits, would be it further enacted that doctors have the responsibility to protect the patients as a subordinate duty due to a principle of faith and sincerity besides the main duty for medical contract-performance since the suit is a litigation form to be based on responsibilities of experts, especially doctors, though having factors that are non-contractual as a trait for medical treatment. Further on the concept, when the plaintiff asserts and proves a specific fact from the recent moderation of the burden of proof about medical malpractices, whether the court should find a true bill in medical malpractice actually or not has been discussed.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제15권1호
• /
• pp.83-122
• /
• 2014

Compared with medical cases and health care law from other countries there has been a lot of progress on medical law, especially on medical precedents in Korea. However, in recent years, medical precedents tend to reflect a realistic position of health care providers, rather than normative position of the victim. The burden of proof to prove strict liability is given to patients in civil law suits by courts, patients generally has the burden of proof. The rate of claims to prove the negligence of medical malpractice is falling significantly. Even if the error is acknowledged, it is not enough to get right to be relief for patients by increasing limitations of liability or ratio of patient's own negligence. Compensation fee is included in medical fees and risk of medical malpractice actions contributes ultimately to a health care consumer. In conclusion, author represents a major the new upgrade of above mentioned problem. By advising that court should assess actively for the perspective of victim for medical negligence we will be able to exercise remedies of patients' rights and to prevent recurring medical accidents and also contribute to medical advances.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제13권1호
• /
• pp.91-123
• /
• 2012

Doctors and patients for the purpose of healing and treatment of disease through the contract will make a relationship. Doctors perform the medical practice for the state and illness of patient. Given that the patient did not cooperate in the doctor's medical practice, it is difficult to achieve the goal of disease healing. If the patient don't cooperate the medical care, and it is linked with a doctor's medical malpractice, patient's violation of obligation in medical cooperation is considered with negligence on the part of patients. However, this negligence should be limited to obvious cases that the patient's behavior is unreasonable although the doctor provides medical information to patients and induced the patient's response. Also, patient's violation of obligation in medical cooperation must result in adjusting the indemnification via a setoff of fault except the cases having causal relationship between doctor's fault and malpractice.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제13권1호
• /
• pp.11-40
• /
• 2012

National Health Insurance Act has been enforced all over the People as part of the effort to assure the minimum constitutional human worth and dignity in the aspect of the right to pursue health for preventing misfortune that comes to death without even a chance to be received treatment for illness or injury. Meanwhile auto insurance is compulsory in certain parts in order to promote benefits of everyday life and the rapid recovery of the damage caused by traffic accident when one have negligently driven a car which has become the necessities in daily life. Any injured driver in a traffic accident can be treated by National Health Insurance without getting an auto insurance in various circumstances, but Article 3 paragraph 2 of Traffic Accident Act don't allow exception of criminal punishment when he has driven a car without license, drunken, or tresspassing the centerline, etc. When the injury occured by his own certain negligence is judged to 'when he has intentionally or through gross negligence caused a criminal conduct or intentionally contributed to the occurrence of an accident' of National Health Insurance Act, insurance benefits can be restricted. Such a restriction could harm the right to pursue happiness and health of People by depriving the poor, who cannot afford to pay, of chances to get treatment. Here we will see benefit restriction by 'gross negligence' of National Health Insurance Act Article 48 paragraph 1, which has largest portion of such restriction. It is desirable to delete 'gross negligence' clause from above paragraph and to interpret 'when' clause restrictively for diminishing confusion of interpreting and guaranteeing the right of health.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제11권2호
• /
• pp.209-235
• /
• 2010

According to the development of medical technology, new medical treatments have been dramatically increased as an inevitable consequence, however, it is not easy for medical workers to learn the knowledge that is necessary for new medical treatments and their additions in the medical services. Therefore, it could not be helped increasing the guidelines for applying new medical treatments, and then, the problem would come out whether to attribute the medical negligence to the doctors who did not follow the guidelines when the patient became worse because of his non-compliance. Nevertheless, there is no document to review the problem mentioned above and also no definite precedents. Thus, the civil lawful character and obligation of guidelines on the lawsuit against the medical default have been examined in this studies. The medical negligence is defined as usual doctors violate the care obligation which is demanded for them to follow when they treat patients under the proper medical standard in those days. It is resonable to assume that the matter of guidelines is to decide the level of the care obligation, that means the care which is required of the rational doctors under same circumstances, and in general, the experts' testimonies should be needed in this case. In addition, the issue comes out whether the guidelines can be the standard of the judgement of the medical negligence. Finally, I suppose, the evaluation of the issue depends on who makes the guidelines, what materials are based on, and also depends on whether there is another guidelines in the same disease, what the purpose of guidelines is to save the medical costs or to realize the appropriate medical services, in addition, it depends on how often renew the guidelines, and how wide is the usage of guidelines.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제9권1호
• /
• pp.165-196
• /
• 2008

Recently the Supreme Court held that "in cases in which a patient suffering from a mental disorder attempts to commit suicide, fails, and then succeeds in a subsequent attempt, the following circumstances must be present in order to acknowledge reasonable causation between the negligence of the hospital with regards to taking care of the patient and the death of the patient; there must have existed negligence on the part of the hospital with regards to their failure to stop the 1stsuicide attempt, injurious aftereffects must have been caused to the patient by the1stsuicide attempt, and said aftereffects must have been the main cause for the 2nd successful suicide attemtp." This, in effect, lessens the requirements of past holdings of the Supreme Court which held that "to acknowledge reasonable causation between the negligence of the hospital and the patient that commits suicide, the patient must have experienced such severe physical and mental suffering from the previous attempt so that they could not help but choose to commit suicide". The fact that the Supreme Court did not clearly state such changes in their view on this matter should be corrected. Also, the fact that the court only held the hospital liable for damages of less than 50 million won, only calculating damages up to the point when the deceased passed, is inadequate compared to other cases and should be corrected.

• 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.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제9권1호
• /
• 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.