• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.9 no.1
• /
• pp.285-317
• /
• 2008

To accept the doctor's professional negligence in the medical malpractice, the mistakes, by which the doctor did not foresee the production of the results in spite of the possibility of foresight and did not avoid the production of the results in spite of the possibility of avoidance, must be considered, and to decide the presence of the doctor's professional negligence, the standard must be the attention standard of general-common doctor engaged in the same business and the same function, and the medical enviornments, the conditions, the extraordinary nature of medical behavior, and etc should be considered by the general level of medical science at the time of accident. This principlel must be applied to the medical malpractice case occurred being on duty without exception. But, because of the extraordinary nature of duty work, it is difficult for any doctor to do one's best technical practice by making all diagnosis, medical treatment with all the equipment on the same plane as the ordinary times. That cannot be also expected for any doctor to do one's best technical practice in the terms of a social idea. From this point of view looking into The Precedent case related to Medical-service person being on duty sentenced by The Supreme Court, unlike the general medical malpractice case, the presence of the professional negligence in the medical malpractice occurred being on duty seems to be decided with more consideration on the general level of medical science, the medical enviornments and the conditions, particularities of medical practice at the time of accident. Especially, the extraordinary nature of medical behavior of the medical service person being on duty in the emergency room seems to be admitted compared to that of the medical service person being on duty in ward.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.24 no.4
• /
• pp.3-36
• /
• 2023

The main issue in medical malpractice civil litigation is medical negligence and the causal relationship between medical negligence and damages. Regarding the presumption of causality in cases where medical negligence is proven, there is a previous Supreme Court decision 93da52402 on February 10, 1995, but it is difficult to find a case that satisfies the textual requirements of the above decision, and yet, in practice, the above decision is cited. In many cases, causal relationships were assumed, and criticism was consistently raised that it was inconsistent with the text of the above judgment. In its ruling, the Supreme Court reorganized and presented a new legal principle regarding the presumption of causality when medical negligence is proven in a civil lawsuit. According to this, If the patient proves ① the existence of an act that is assessed as a medical negligence, that is, a violation of the duty of care required of an ordinary medical professional at the level of medical care practiced in the field of clinical medicine at the time of medical practice, and ② that the negligence is likely to cause damages to the patient, the burden of proving the causal relationship is alleviated by presuming a causal relationship between medical negligence and damage. Here, the probability of occurrence of damage does not need to be proven beyond doubt from a natural scientific or medical perspective, but if recognizing the causal relationship between the negligence and the damage does not comply with medical principles or if there is a vague possibility that the negligence will cause damage, causality cannot be considered proven. Meanwhile, even if a causal relationship between medical negligence and damage is presumed, the party that performed the medical treatment can overturn the presumption by proving that the patient's damage was not caused by medical negligence. Meanwhile, unlike civil cases, the standard is 'proof beyond reasonable doubt' in criminal cases, and the legal principle of presuming causality does not apply. Accordingly, in a criminal case of professional negligence manslaughter that was decided on the same day regarding the same medical accident, the case was overturned and remanded for not guilty due to lack of proof of a causal relationship between medical negligence and death. The above criminal ruling is a ruling that states that even if 'professional negligence' is recognized in a criminal case related to medical malpractice, the person should not be judged guilty if there is a lack of clear proof of 'causal relationship'.

• Journal of muscle and joint health
• /
• v.28 no.1
• /
• pp.30-40
• /
• 2021

Purpose: This study aims to present nurses' legal conflicts and legal basis through the precedent analysis of a crime of professional negligence resulting in death and injury for the past 20 years and provide vital references to cultivate the correct and high-level legal consciousness of nurses. Methods: This study was conducted in five stages of the systematic content analysis method. It amalyses the precedents of a crime of nurses' professional negligence resulting in death and injury from 2000 to 2020. The application system for the provision of the written judgment was used to collect precedents. A total of 67 cases were analyzed in this study, and they were classified according to the type of nursing error, and the contents were systematically analyzed. Results: A total of 52 cases (77.5%) of nursing errors were caused by independent nursing practices. They were classified as 38 cases (A1) in the violation of patient supervision obligations, 12 cases in the violation of progress observation obligations (A2), one case in the violation of medical equipment inspection obligations (A3), and one case in the violation of explanation and verification obligations. Among the non-independent nursing practices (code B), B1 was 10 cases related to administrative acts, one blood transfusion accident (B2), and one anesthesia accident (B3). Conclusion: To prevent nurses from being involved in legal confits, the advocation of systematic training such as nurses' legal obligations and judgment grounds through case-based learning from the recent precedent analysis and promote nurses' legal perspective, and preventive activities are essential.

• 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.

• Child Health Nursing Research
• /
• v.28 no.2
• /
• pp.91-102
• /
• 2022

Purpose: This study systematically analyzed cases in South Korea wherein nurses were prosecuted for involuntary manslaughter or injury due to professional negligence in pediatric care. Methods: We analyzed the precedents using the methodology of Hall and Wright (2008) and Austin (2010). Of the 618 cases retrieved from the Supreme Court Decisions Retrieval System in South Korea, we selected the 12 cases in which children were the victims and nurses were the defendants, using a case screening methodology. Results: The most frequent penalty was a fine, and newborns were the most frequent victims. The distribution of cases according to Austin's violation categories was: improper administration of medications (n=5), failure to monitor for and report deterioration (n=4), ineffective communication (n=4), failure to delegate responsibly (n=4), failure to know and follow facility policies and procedures (n=1), and improper use of equipment (n=1). Conclusion: To ensure the safety of children, nurses are required to teach and practice a high standard of care. Nursing education programs must improve nurses' awareness of their legal obligations. Nursing organizations and leaders should also work towards enacting effective nursing laws and ensuring that nurses are aware of their legal rights and responsibilities.

• 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.

• Journal of the Korea Institute of Building Construction
• /
• v.13 no.2
• /
• pp.102-111
• /
• 2013

During the administration of a construction project, various types of participants are engaged in the project. From the design phase to the maintenance phase, these participants may confront many risks. To avoid these risks, participants should utilize an insurance company or a bond company. The types of risks and liability that a construction manager may face are listed in the construction law or contract. But there are some arguments related to risk transferring and the content of risks. For this reason, construction managers must carefully consider any possible risks in the contract and the construction law. Therefore, for construction managers to deal with risks appropriately, the introduction of a legal requirement to carry professional liability insurance, a defined compensation range for damages, a method of guarantee in the event of defects, a defined compensation claim period for damage, and a method of damage claim were suggested in this study.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.15 no.2
• /
• pp.435-459
• /
• 2014

Supreme Court of Korea has been mitigating the burden of proof on the malpractice and causal relation by a patient in accordance with the practical transfer of such burden of proof on causal relation as well as relieving a doctor's burden of proof on mistake in the civil damage claim suits on the malpractice. However, a prosecutor shall strictly prove the causal relation between malpractice and unfavorable results as well as a doctor's mistake in the criminal cases for making a doctor accept the professional negligence resulting in death or injury in accordance with In Dubio Pro Reo principles. Furthermore, it shall not be allowed to relieve the burden of proof on malpractice and causal relation which has been frequently applied in the civil proceedings. Nevertheless, it was widely known that the front-line courts accepted the malpractice and causal relation by quoting the legal principles on relieving the burden of proof on malpractice and causal relation applied in the civil cases even in criminal cases with no or insufficient proof on malpractice or causal relation. However, the latest precedents in Supreme Court explicitly declared the opinion that there was no reason to apply the legal principle to relieve the burden of proof on the malpractice and causal relation in the criminal cases requiring the proof 'which doesn't cause any reasonable doubt' on malpractice and causal relation in accordance with the legal principles 'favorable judgment for a defendant in case of any doubt' on the basis of the strict principle of 'nulla poena sine lege.' Accordingly, Supreme court definitely clarified that there would be no reason to relieve the burden of proof on malpractice and causal relation in criminal cases by reversing several original judgments accepting malpractice and causal relation even though there were no strict evidence.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.9 no.2
• /
• 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.

• Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing Administration
• /
• v.5 no.1
• /
• pp.113-136
• /
• 1999

There are some new trends in judgments concerning medical malpractice. which include emphasis on medical professionals' explanation duty in order to materialize patient's rights of self-determination. Now, patient is not a mere subject of medical and nursing care any more, but a subject, participating in medical practice on equal terms with medical professionals. Legal accountability is no limited to nurses in advanced practice: it is a recognized fact of life for every practicing nurse. whether she is an RN employed as a staff nurse in a hospital, a Certified Nurse-Midwife in independent practice or a patient's home. Therefore, it is essential for nurses to be as familiar as possible with the legal guidelines that govern their patient care responsibilities. However there are only a few studies focused on nursing negligence. To define nurse's civil liability in medical malpractice, it is necessary to indentify both legal nursing behaviors and nurse's due care in those nursing behaviors. So this paper focused on nurse's due care, especially in nursing malpractice. To clarify nurses' due care. chapter II has focused on nursing behavior and the scope of nursing practice based on the medical law and health care related study results. Chapter III deals with the content and scope of nurse's due care. Generally. negligence is defined as not doing something which a resonable person. guided by those ordinary considerations which or dinarily regulate human affairs. would do. or doing something which a resonable and prudent man would not do. Next. it describes how we can set the standard of due care in nursing practice. There is objective factors and subjective factors. And we also discuss about the limitation of due care in nursing practice. Finally. chapter IV deals with the case studies related to nursing negligence in the situation of determination. Now', patient is not a mere subject of medical and nursing care any more, but a subject participating in medical practice on equal terms with medical professionals. Legal accountability is not limited to nurses in advanced practice; it is a recognized fact of life for every practicing nurse. whether she is an RN employed as a staff nurse in a hospital. a Certified Nurse-Midwife in independent practice or a patient's home. Therefore, it is essential for nurses to be as familiar as possible with the legal guidelines that govern their patient care responsibilities. However. there are only a few studies focused on nursing negligence. To define nurse's civil liability in medical malpractice, it is necessary to identify both legal nursing behaviors and nurse's due care in those nursing behaviors. So this paper focused on nurse's intravenous injection. post operation nursing care. blood transfusion. and patient nursing care. The result of this paper is as follows. First. there are several cases dealing with nurse's negligence in nursing practice. however, those cases didn't judge nurse's due care based on individual -specific standard but general-objective standard. Second, there is a tendency to put an emphasis on the principal of belief to distinguish who has the liability in the case of medical malpractice among medical care team. So nurses shoud practice nursing care more actively to protect themselves and patients because there is an effort to form professional nurse system and the scope of nursing practice will be deeper and broader. Third, standard of care is a necessary element in establishing negligence. If a nurse is able to meet the standard of care, no breach will be found.