• 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.

• Journal of Radiation Protection and Research
• /
• 제29권4호
• /
• pp.221-230
• /
• 2004

방사선작업종사자에게 발생한 암의 방사선 인과도를 평가하기 위한 통계적 측도로 인과확률(Probability of Causation)이 주로 이용된다. 인과확률의 계산 과정에는 다양한 형태의 불확실성이 존재하며, 따라서 인과확률은 하나의 점추정치(point estimate)가 아니라 여러 불확실성을 반영한 분포 또는 신뢰구간으로 평가되어야 한다. 본 연구에서는 국내 방사선작업종사자에게서 발생한 암의 방사선 인과도를 평가하기 위하여, 한국인의 기저자료를 반영하며 가장 최근에 발표된 NCI-CDC 모형에 근거하여 인과확률의 분포를 계산하도록 개발된 전산 프로그램 RHRI-PEPC를 소개한다. 또한 방사선작업종사자의 가상 피폭시나리오에 대한 모의실험을 통해, 인과확률의 점추정치와 불확실성 분포에 의한 방사선 인과도 평가 결과의 차이를 살펴보고 분포에 의한 평가의 경우 적절한 신뢰도 선택의 필요성을 제시한다.

• 한국항해항만학회지
• /
• 제34권3호
• /
• pp.251-255
• /
• 2010

해양사고는 민사법상의 손해배상, 형법상의 책임의 귀속 및 행정상의 제재와 같은 여러 가지 법적 책임 문제를 야기한다. 어떠한 행위에 의하여 결과가 발생하였다고 하여 바로 책임귀속이 되는 것은 아니다. 이러한 책임의 전제로서 해양사고를 야기한 행위와 그 결과 발생사이에 인과관계가 문제된다. 해양사고에 있어서 그 원인 규명은 해양이라는 사고 발생 장소, 증거확보의 어려움, 사고 발생시와 조사 시점과의 시간차 등으로 어려움이 많다. 그러나 정확한 원인 규명은 유사 사고 방지와 책임 소재를 가리는데 매우 중요한 요소이다. 인과관계를 논리학적으로 보면 무한히 확산 가능한 개념이지만 책임귀속에 있어서는 이를 제한할 필요성이 있다. 따라서 이 논문에서는 인과관계 이론을 바탕으로 해양사고에서의 인과관계를 검토하여 책임귀속의 합리적인 판단 기준을 논증한 것이다.

• Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
• /
• 제59권1호
• /
• pp.1-5
• /
• 2016

Chronic subdural hematomas (CSHs) are generally regarded to be a traumatic lesion. It was regarded as a stroke in 17th century, an inflammatory disease in 19th century. From 20th century, it became a traumatic lesion. CSH frequently occur after a trauma, however, it cannot occur when there is no enough subdural space even after a severe head injury. CSH may occur without trauma, when there is sufficient subdural space. The author tried to investigate trends in the causation of CSH. By a review of literature, the author suggested a different view on the causation of CSH. CSH usually originated from either a subdural hygroma or an acute subdural hematoma. Development of CSH starts from the separation of the dural border cell (DBC) layer, which induces proliferation of DBCs with production of neomembrane. Capillaries will follow along the neomembrane. Hemorrhage would occur into the subdural fluid either by tearing of bridge veins or repeated microhemorrhage from the neomembrane. That is the mechanism of hematoma enlargement. Trauma or bleeding tendency may precipitate development of CSH, however, it cannot lead CSH, if there is no sufficient subdural space. The key determinant for development of CSH is a sufficient subdural space, in other words, brain atrophy. The most common and universal cause of brain atrophy is the aging. Modifying Virchow's description, CSH is sometimes traumatic, but most often caused by degeneration of the brain. Now, it is reasonable that degeneration of brain might play pivotal role in development of CSH in the aged persons.

• 패션비즈니스
• /
• 제8권3호
• /
• pp.34-48
• /
• 2004

This study aims to determine any possible causation between identifying which major factors affect CRM(Customer Relationship Management) in terms of promotion strategies for fashion goods and classifying customers into several categories, so that it can seek reasonable strategic measures based on CRM. This study suggested a model by selecting several variables meeting its goals, and used total 672 sheets of questionnaire for final analysis. In addition, a structural equation model was analyzed As a result, it was found that pricing flexibility had more or less influential relationships with trust, satisfaction and commitment in CRM, although having a negative relationship with commitment. Salesperson's role was also significantly correlated with trust, satisfaction and commitment in CRM, and especially, there were more influential relationships with satisfaction than any other factor. Service quality had relatively high influential relationships with trust, satisfaction and commitment in CRM. Retained customers showed more or less influential relationships with trust, satisfaction and commitment, while loyal customers did so with satisfaction and commitment, except for trust.

• 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.

• 한국식품위생안전성학회지
• /
• 제26권4호
• /
• pp.302-307
• /
• 2011

One of the most important objectives of post-marketing monitoring of dietary supplements is the early detection of unknown and unexpected adverse events (AEs). Several causality algorithms, such as the Naranjo scale, the RUCAM scale, and the M & V scale are available for the estimation of the likelihood of causation between a product and an AE. Based on the existing algorithms, the Korea Food & Drug Administration has developed a new algorithm tool to reflect the characteristics of dietary supplements in the causality analysis. However, additional work will be required to confirm if the newly developed algorithm tool has reasonable sensitivity and not to generate an unacceptable number of false positives signals.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제58권
• /
• pp.3-33
• /
• 2013

The purpose of this paper is to examine the problems in exercising buyer's right to claim damages for the breach of contract by the seller in international sales contract and to suggest reasonable counter-measures. The main contents are as follows: First, this author analyzed the principles of the seller's liability for damages in detail and examined the methods for the calculation of damages on the basis of Arts.74~77. As these articles are found to be insufficient in practical application, this author further examined the UNIDROIT Principles(2004) to confirm whether these Principles can fill the gaps of CISG or not, which turned out their gap-filling functions. Second, this author tried to find any expected problems when the buyer resorts to the right to claim damages in case of the seller's breach of contract including the estimation of damages, the burden of proof, causation, the proof of appropriateness for avoidance, the proof of buyer's obligation to mitigate the loss and so on. The reason is that these problems may cause a lot of difficulties in real business. As result, many buyers have given up their reasonable rights to claim damages so far. Finally, from the buyer's perspective, this author would like to suggest a liquidated damage clause(LD Clause) which gives the buyer to received a specified sum in case of seller's non-performance and/or a demand guarantee(or standby L/C) which guarantees buyer to secure unconditional payment independent of the underlying contract. For these purposes, the buyer should try to insert the LD Clause and/or Guarantee Clause in the contract when the buyer and the seller negotiate the sales contract. Also there are a lot of considerations and limitations in using the LD Clause and the Guarantee Clause in their real business, mainly dependent up bargain power between the seller and the buyer, for which this author promise to examine in detail in the future.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제20권3호
• /
• pp.83-139
• /
• 2019

의료과오에 의한 손해배상책임의 인정은 크게 두 가지 축을 기본으로 하여 전개되어 왔다. 첫째는 의사의 과실 있는 진료행위가 있고 이로 인하여 생명·신체 등의 법익이 침해당하고, 생명·신체 침해로부터 발생한 재산적·비재산적 손해에 대한 배상이 문제되는 경우이다. 둘째는 의사의 설명의무 위반이 있고 이로 인하여 자기결정권이 침해당하고, 자기결정권 침해로부터 발생한 비재산적 손해에 대한 배상이 문제되는 경우이다. 그러나 의료과오가 있더라도 환자의 기존상태 등으로 말미암아 의사의 과실 있는 진료행위와 법익침해 사이에 인과관계 증명이 곤란하여 의사의 손해배상책임이 부정되는 경우가 있다. 예를 들어, 환자가 이미 심한 말기암에 걸려있어서 의사로부터 적절한 치료를 받았더라도 완치되었을 가능성이 매우 낮은 경우를 생각해 보자. 이 때 의사의 과실이 없더라도 환자는 사망하였을 가능성이 매우 크다는 이유로 환자에게 어떠한 손해배상도 인정하지 않는 것은 타당하지 않다. 의사의 과실 있는 진료행위로 인하여 환자에게는 최소한 정신적 고통과 같은 비재산적 손해가 발생하였기 때문이다. 위와 같은 경우에 우리 법원은 예외적으로 적절한 치료를 받을 기회를 상실했음을 이유로 하여 위자료 배상을 인정해주고 있다. 그러나 이론적 체계가 정교하지 못하여 어떤 것을 보호법익으로 삼는지 명확하게 밝히지 못하고 있다. 의사의 과실 있는 진료행위와 생명·신체라는 법익의 침해 사이에 인과관계가 부정되더라도 새로운 보호법익을 설정하여 환자에게 발생한 손해를 배상해주려는 최근의 논의가 바로 '치료기회상실의 법리'이다. 이 보호법익의 내용이 무엇인지에 관하여 치유가능성론, 기대권침해론, 연명할 상당한 정도의 가능성 침해론, 치료기회상실론 등이 주장되고 있다. 이 보호법익의 내용은 치료기회상실론에 따라 '의료수준에 비추어 적절한 치료를 받을 이익'으로 보는 것이 타당하다. 환자의 위와 같은 이익은 어느 누구로부터 침해받거나 방해받아서는 안 되는 인간의 존엄한 가치임과 동시에, 생명에 관한 근원적인 욕구이며 법적으로 보호받아야 할 가치 있는 이익이라고 할 수 있다. 이런 측면에서 '의료수준에 적절한 치료를 받을 이익'은 정신적 법익에 관한 일반적 인격권의 하나로써 구체화될 수 있다.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제7권2호
• /
• pp.9-74
• /
• 2006

Due to the awareness of their rights for medical liability and the advancement of legal principles, it becomes also not hard to find those who seek damages against hospitals, doctors and nurses for the suicide committed under the protection of psychiatric institute in Korea these days. Judgements on these kinds of cases are not enough yet, so that it may be too early to try to find principles used in these cases, however it is hardly wrong to read following things from above cases. That is, to gain the case, plaintiffs should show (1) there exists an obligation of "due care"(there is a special relation between patients and hospitals), (2) the duty is violated on the basis of the applicable standard of care, (3) whatever injures or damages are sustained are proximately caused by the breach of duty and (4) the plaintiff suffers compensable damages. To specific, whether a psychiatric institute was liable for wrong death or not depends upon the patients conditions, circumstances and the extent of the danger the patients poses to himself or herself; in short, the foreseeability of self-inflicted harm(the doctor should have or could reasonably have foreseen the patient's suicide and the doctor's negligence actually caused the suicide). In this context if a patient exhibit strong suicidal tendencies, constant observation should be required. Negligence has been found not exist, however, when a patient abruptly and unexpectedly dashes from an attendant and jumps out a window or otherwise attempts to injure himself or herself. And the standard of conduct that is required to meet the obligation of "due care" is based on what the "reasonable practitioner" would do in like circumstances. The standard is not one of excellence or superior practice; it only re quires that the physician exercise that degree of skill and care that would be expected of the average qualified practitioner practicing under like circumstances. Most of these principles have been established at cases of the U.S.A and Japan. In this article you can also find the legal organizations of medical liability and medical contacts on the suicide of patients who have psychiatric diseases under Korean negligence law.