• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.21 no.2
• /
• pp.37-73
• /
• 2020

Medical practice with medical adaptability is not illegal. Consent to medical practice is also not intended to exclude causes of Illegality. The patient's consent to medical practice is the exercise of the right to self-determination, and the patient's right to self-determination is take shape through the doctor's information. If a doctor violates his duty to inform, failure to inform or lack of inform constitutes an act of illegality of omission in itself. As a result, the legal interest of self-determination is violated. The patient has the right to know and make decisions on his or her own, even when it is not connected to the benefit of life and body as the subject of the body. If that infringed and lost, the non-property damage shall be recognized and the immaterial damage must be compensated. On the other hand, the violation of the duty of information does not belong to deny the compensation for physical damage. Which the legal interest violated by violation of the obligation to inform is the self-determination, and loss of opportunity of choice is recognized as ordinary damage. However, if the opportunity of choice was lost because of the infringement of the right to self-determination and the patient could not choice the better way, that dose not occur plainly bad results, under the prove of these causal relationship, that bad results could be compensated. But the unexpectable damage could not be compensated, because the physical damage is considered as the special damage due to the violation of the right of the self-determination.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.9 no.1
• /
• pp.319-382
• /
• 2008

As a withdrawing care's study, the purpose of this study is searching about withdrawing care's acceptance and circumstances through Bora-mae hospital case(chapter 1). Withdrawing life-sustaining treatment has various forms. Though the meaning of euthanasia, death with dignity, natural death, physician assisted suicide are duplicated, the meaning of those are different slightly. Firstly, this study looks about the difference of the those meaning and acceptance range(condition) by withdrawing care's forms(chapter 2). Bora-mae hospital case sentenced guilty about physician who discharged incompetent patient who was after surgery by patient's wife determination. This Bora-mae case that sentenced guilty about discharge against medical advise(DAMA) that is regarded to custom has brought intensive confliction of legal, social, medical aspect, Bora-mae hospital case has many legal problems. First, as to criminal law rule 250(murder), the problem is whether discharge and withdrawing life-sustaining treatment is commission or omission. this study concluded omission(district court: omission, appeal, supreme court: commission). Because legal denounce point of discharge and medical treatment withdrawing is omission that physician who is obligatory on patient to cure. If physician's act is regarded omission, it is necessary to determine whether he has guardian status and obligation. Without guardian status and obligation, omission crime can't exist. This study decided that physician had guardian status and obligation and foundation of guardian status was pre-action or acceptance of emergency patient. Physician's medical treatment duty finished when patient(or patient's guardian) demands discharge. But when patient death is foreseen and other possible treatment does not exist, his duty of life prolonging treatment does not finish. This originate from physician's social responsibility and public status that limits patient's private liberty. This study regarded physician's action as accomplice about whether physician's discharging action is accomplice or the principal offender(district court: the principal offender, appeal, supreme court: accomplice). Though the principal offender needs criminal determination and action, there is no this common determination and functional action control of physician in Bora-mae case(chapter 3). Bora-mae hospital case partly originated from deficiency of legal, institutive system including medical security system shortage, the instruction is 1. medical security system strengthening, 2. hospital ethical committee's activity strengthening, 3. institutionalization of withdrawing life-sustaining treatment, 4. acceptance of pre-decision making system, 5. sufficient persuasion of physician for patient and faithful writing of medical paper, 6. respect for patients' self-determination and rights, 7. consciousness's changing for withdrawing life-sustaining treatment and persistent education about medical ethics(chapter 4). Considering Bora-mae case, medical sector is not the dead ground of a criminal punishment. Intervention of criminal law in medical sector give rise to ill effect, that is, excess medical examination and treatment, safeguard treatment, delay of discharge from a hospital. Because sufficient guarantee of life becomes mere empty slogan under situation that impose a burden of heavy cost to family or hospital, public and systematic solution should be given(chapter 5).

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.23 no.1
• /
• pp.37-80
• /
• 2022

By analyzing informed consent and the refusal of emergency medical treatment (called patient dumping) under the current Emergency Medical Service Act, this study suggests that an emergency medical professional is only liable for patient dumping if their duty to protect the patient's life takes precedence over the patient's right to self-determination. In emergency medical situations, as in general medical situations, medical treatment should be performed after the emergency medical professional informs the patient about the medical treatment, including its necessity and methods, and obtains consent from the patient. Refusing or evading the performance of emergency medical services on the excuse of the informed consent not considering a waiver or alteration of informed consent requirements without reasonable reasons violates the Emergency Medical Service Act and thus makes an emergency medical professional liable to administrative disposition or criminal penalty. In other words, depending on the existence of a waiver of alteration of the informed consent, patient dumping may be established. If the patient is a minor or has no decision-making ability, and their legal representative makes a decision against the patient's medical interests, the opinion of the legal representative is not unconditionally respected. A minor also has the right to decide over their body, and the decisions of their legal representatives should be in the patient's best interests. If the patient refuses treatment, in principle, the obligation of life protection of emergency medical professionals is the top priority. However, making these decisions in the aforementioned situations in the emergency medical field is difficult because of the absence of explicit regulations regarding these exceptional problems. This study aims to organize the following precedents of the Supreme Court of Korea. The court states that, when balancing the conflicting interests between the duty to provide emergency medical service and the duty to inform is unavoidable for emergency medical professionals, they should put the duty to protect the patient's life ahead of the duty to inform if the patient's life matters. Exceptionally, when a patient has seriously considered whether they should receive treatment before the emergency medical situation, their right to self-determination can be considered equal to the obligation of emergency medical professionals to provide emergency medical treatment. This research also suggests that an amendment of the Emergency Medical Service Act should include the following. First, the criteria for determining the decision-making ability of emergency patients should consist of medical content. Second, additional consent from a medical professional is unnecessary for first-aid treatment. Finally, new provisions for emergency medical obligations for minors, new provisions for the decision standard when there are conflicting opinions about the treatment of a patient, and new penalty provisions for professionals who suspend emergency medical examinations and treatments need to be established.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.17 no.2
• /
• pp.257-279
• /
• 2016

Recently, the Well-dying Act was legislated in Korea, and it will come into effect in August 4, 2017. This Act allows to withdraw the life sustaining treatment from impending death patients and also provide the hospice and palliative treatment to terminal patients. In the Supreme Court's case so called "Madam Kim", medical condition of Madam Kim was a persistent vegetative status owing to brain damage and her family members wanted to remove the artificial ventilation. In 2009, the Supreme Court allowed to withdraw the artificial ventilation under the specific conditions. We applied this new Well-dying Act to the Madam Kim's case hypothetically in order to know this Act can reasonably solve the problem of life sustaining treatment for dying or terminal patients. For the impending patients, the Well-dying Act has the problem not to withdraw the futile treatment due to the advance directives of patients. Vice versa, the terminal patients have no chance to withdraw the life sustaining treatment due to the this Act impose the duty to provide the hospice and palliative treatment despite of advance directives. We need to ruke out the persistent vegetative patients from the terminal patients caused by the cancer, acquired immune deficiency syndrome, chronic obstructive lung disease and chronic liver cirrhosis, In addition, we have to discuss the effect of the advance directives of terminal patients in view of self determination right.

• 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 Hospice and Palliative Care
• /
• v.21 no.1
• /
• pp.1-8
• /
• 2018

Nearly 20 years after the Boramea Hospital case, the act on decisions on life-sustaining treatment for patients in hospice and palliative care or at the end of life has taken effect on February 4, 2018 as recommended by the National Bioethics Committee. However, during the legislation process, some parts of the bill that stakeholders and concerned parties did not see eye to eye were either revised or removed. Moreover, the hospice and palliative care part was added in the last minute before the enactment. As a result, the law includes parts that are not in line with the recommendations from the National Bioethics Committee, thereby causing various problems. Therefore, it is crucial to monitor how the decisions on life-sustaining treatments are made in the field and gather various opinions of concerned parties to identify and address problems in the early stage of the implementation of the law. Based on the data, the legislation must be amended to fulfill its purpose that is "to protect the dignity and value of human beings by assuring the best interests of the patients and by respecting their self-determination".

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.23 no.2
• /
• pp.67-96
• /
• 2022

"Aid in Dying" means that when a decision-making patient suffers from an incurable disease, a drug that can speed up death is prescribed by a doctor and used to lead to death. Since the suspension of life-sustaining treatment was institutionalized based on human dignity and patient autonomy, the question of whether assisted death can be legally justified in relation to the right to receive medical help to shorten one's life to die with dignity has recently been actively discussed. In Korea, since the suspension of life-sustaining treatment was institutionalized by the enactment of the Life-sustaining Treatment Decision Act in 2016, an amendment to the Life-sustaining Treatment Act was recently proposed to legalize Aid in Dying. The global trend is that human "Right to Die" is discussed in the division of life and death, from the suspension of life-sustaining treatment to assisted death, and again in the order of euthanasia. In this paper, we started discussing dignified death and institutionalized patients' right to self-determination, looked at the controversy in the United States, which legislated assisted death in many states since the 2000s, and analyzed the main contents of California's End of Life Option Act and the data after enforcement. The strict requirements for Aid in Dying, such as voluntary confirmation of patients' intentions and doctors' obligation to provide information, and the results of California's Aid in dying system, composed of relatively diverse races, were reviewed.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.22 no.4
• /
• pp.185-210
• /
• 2021

On September 24, 2021, the new provisions(Article 38-2 of the Medical Service Act) mandatory CCTV installation in operating rooms where the unconscious patient is operating such as general anesthesia. The revised medical law aims to effectively prevent illegal activities that may occur in the operating rooms and to promote appropriate resolution to medical dispute. According to the law, medical institutions operating unconscious patients, such as general anesthesia, must install CCTVs in the operating rooms by September 25, 2023, and film surgical scenes only at the request of patients and their guardians, regardless of the consent of the medical personnel. The bill delegated the legislative device to minimize infringement of fundamental rights to subordinate statutes without stipulating it in the law.(Article 38-2(10)) The most realistic policy plan to minimize the infringement of the fundamental rights of patients is to prepare specific regulations. Therefore, this study examines the legislative background and main contents of the amended CCTV installation bill, and suggests issues to be reviewed when preparing subordinate statutes by analyzing major issues. It was reviewed based on compliance with the principle of minimizing infringement of fundamental rights of information subjects in the operating rooms. The information subjects of CCTV are health professionals and patients. Suggesting issues should be considered when preparing subordinate statutes so that the purpose of the CCTV installation law can be achieved while minimizing infringement of right of self-determination of personal information, personality rights, and human rights. It is hoped that this paper will be referred when discussing subordinate statutes and regulations to contribute minimizing infringement of fundamental rights.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.24 no.2
• /
• pp.79-117
• /
• 2023

Among the healthcare-related judgments handed down in 2002, there was a significant ruling on the timing of the duty of explanation, stating that, in order to ensure the exercise of the patient's right to self-determination, the patient must be given time to consider and decide on the risks and side effects of a medical procedure in specific circumstances. In addition, in a case where an insurance company claimed unjust enrichment against a medical institution on behalf of its insureds, the court provided a clear standard by distinguishing between active and passive requirements regarding the need to preserve the right of subrogation of creditors. In the area of medical administration, there was a ruling that clarified that a medical institution's business suspension under the National Health Insurance Act is directed against the medical institution, a ruling that broadly recognized causation in a case of compensation for side effects of corona vaccination, and a ruling on the scope of a medical practitioner's license, such as the use of ultrasound devices by an oriental medicine practitioner. In a case involving a patient's claim for eviction from a medical institution, the court reviewed a ruling on just cause for termination of a hospitalization contract in relation to Article 15(1) of the Medical law.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.20 no.1
• /
• pp.109-132
• /
• 2019

Recently, medical accidents related to surgical procedures have increased. In addition, the media reported that some of these accidents were involved in health crimes. Patient-advocate groups have called for mandatory establishment and management of CCTV in operating rooms. There is a lot of discussion among the interested parties, so it is necessary to review the relevant laws and regulations. The purpose of this study is to identify the characteristics of CCTV in operating rooms and to review legislations related to establishment and management of the CCTV in operating rooms. Medical institutions use CCTV for management of facilities and patient safety and install it in operating rooms optionally. The Constitution guarantees the privacy and the privacy of correspondence of every citizen, but it can be limited by the law for public welfare. Currently, however, there is no existing law about establishment and management of the CCTV in operating rooms and it can be defect of legal system. Under the current legislations, it is likely that the Self-determination can be violated due to the characteristic of healthcare provider when CCTV is mandatorily installed in operating room. In addition, the regulations on access and leakage of confidential information known by operator are insufficient. So that, the safety of the visual data might be threatened. Furthermore, unless the period and the place of storage of the visual data are clearly defined, it is highly unlikely to meet the original purpose of patient safety and prevention of medical accidents. This study is meaningful as there is few previous study on this topic although the need for legal review about this is growing and several bills are being proposed. It is expected that the results of this study can be utilized as basic data for enactment or amendment of the laws and regulations about establishment and management of CCTV in operating rooms.