• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.10 no.2
• /
• pp.343-405
• /
• 2009

This paper is to discuss essential business of hospital business. While the labor world and ILO made continuous recommendation for improvements towards the compulsory arbitration system along with the controversy over unconstitutionality of the system, the Constitutional Court ruled that the system is constitutional on December 23, 1996(90hunba19) and on May 15, 2003 (2001hunga31). Despite this decision from the Constitutional Court, there has been much controversy over whether the compulsory arbitration system infringes the rights of collective action against the principle of trade union & labor relations adjustment which allows Commissioner of the Labor Relations Commission to decide on submission of arbitration by virtue of his/her authority in case where industrial disputes take place in the essential public-service businesses. The revision on the above provision was closely examined from the year 2003 and an agreement was made on the abolition of the compulsory arbitration system and the introduction of essential business with a grand compromise among labor unions, employers and the government on September 11, 2006 followed by revision(Essential business system enacted on January 1, 2008) of the Trade Union & Labor Relations Adjustment Act on December 30 in the same year. Accordingly, in order to perform the essential business, parties to labor relations must have an agreement or obtain a decision by the Labor Relations Commission before taking industrial actions. This paper firstly examined the concept of essential public-service businesses and essential business, legal meaning of essential business, procedures for making agreement and decision and legal effects. Secondly it intensively explored a theory against the principle of the legality which was raised from some part of society. In other words, it is claimed that a theory against the principle of the legality is not consistent with the rule of legislation and some abstract wording is against void for vagueness doctrine because part of crime constitution requirements is delegated to the Presidential Decree or to consultation among parties to labor relations. But analysis on the rule of legislation and void for vagueness doctrine reflected in the decision by the Constitutional Court led that argument for a theory against the principle of the legality is not reasonable. Close examination was done on a formal act of essential business agreement and necessity of prior agreement before submission of decision to the Labor Relations Commission which might have difficulties in performing work. In addition, an example agreement on hospital essential business is attached to help you understand this paper better.

• Korean Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
• /
• v.17 no.1
• /
• pp.119-127
• /
• 2016

Since May 23, 2014, the Construction Technology Promotion Act has been effect through the entire reform of the Act. Despite the extensive reform, the previous penalty articles remain intact. According to the article 85 (1), especially, if a service provider or an engineer has caused death or injury by violating the duty of good faith and by damaging the principal parts of facilities, the person should be sentenced for lifetime imprisonment or imprisonment for no less than three years. The article has been controversial in its clarity and adequacy. This study is to verify the characteristics and the scope of the article and to suggest the theoretical backgrounds by analyzing the article based on the principle of legality, which enables to set forth the possibility to improve the article. To achieve the goal, the provision has been analyzed in accordance with the basic laws in Korea including the constitutional law and the criminal law, the related cases have been collected, and the comparison of the relevant acts has been executed. The detailed discussion about the articles in laws and acts on construction and the long-term and integrated study are expected to vitalize through this research.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.23 no.1
• /
• pp.3-33
• /
• 2022

In relation to telemedicine in Korea's medical law, there are Articles 17, 17-2, and 34 of the Medical Act. Since 'direct examination' in Articles 17 and 17-2 of the Medical Act can be interpreted as 'self-examination' rather than 'face-to-face examination', it is difficult to see the above regulation as a regulation prohibiting telemedicine. Prohibiting telemedicine only with the concept of medical examination or the 'principle of face-to-face treatment' is against the principle of "nulla poena sine lege"(the principle of legality). However, in order to qualify as 'examination', it must be faithful enough to replace face-to-face examination, so issuing a medical certificate or prescription after a poor examination over the phone is considered a violation of the Medical Act. In that respect, the above regulation can be said to be a regulation that indirectly limits telemedicine. On the other hand, most lawyers interpret that telemedicine between medical personnel and patients is completely prohibited based on Article 34, and the Supreme Court recently ruled that such telemedicine is not permitted even if there is a patient's request. However, this interpretation is not only far from the legislative intention at the time when telemedicine regulations were introduced into the Medical Act of 2002, but also does not match the needs of reality or the legislative trend of foreign countries. The reason is that telemedicine regulations are erroneously legislated. The premise of the legislation is wrong, and there are considerable problems in the form and content of the legislation. As a result, contrary to the original legislative intent, telemedicine was completely banned. In foreign countries, it is difficult to find cases where telemedicine is completely banned and criminal punishment is imposed for it. In order to fundamentally solve the problem of telemedicine, Article 34 of the Medical Act needs to be deleted.

• Management & Information Systems Review
• /
• v.4
• /
• pp.611-629
• /
• 2000

In the legislation interpretation and fundamental viewpoint about the legal system of insider trading, Japan strictly legislate under the proposition, the principle of 'nulla poena,' adopted 'the principle of limited enumeration,' and United states, under 'the principle of comprehension,' has entrusted courts with establishment of concrete concepts and standard, so the courts are very flexible in determining the range of insiders and the importance of inside information to show a strong will to eradicate insider trading. Korea has a legislative position of 'the principle of limited indication' which has been created by the negotiation between those principles of United states and Japan. Though this court has interpreted insider trading, insider trading using non-disclosed information has increased lately, needing the strengthening of its regulations. However, this shows us that sophisticate the regulations may be, the exposure of insider trading has limitations. The most important thing is to change recognition for transparency of the securities market, security of investors and to establish the atmosphere which is that fair stock trading made in a sound capital market to raise funds for corporation. The policies of improving unfair trading, self-regulation bodies, raising the transparency and legality of procedures of supervision and monitoring and applying 'compliance program' to stock companies are very needed to eliminate unfair trading in the securities market and establish the order of trading.

• Journal of Legislation Research
• /
• no.44
• /
• pp.241-281
• /
• 2013

First and foremost, a discussion concerning government structure has to be done in connection with the state form and the governmental form. For practical reasons, there is a need to balance the principle of legality and its exceptions under the Government Organization Act. To ensure the flexibility of government structure with respect to the principle of legality, the National Assembly should accept the government structure requested by the newly elected government. This mitigates the rigidity of the principle of the legality within the government organizations. However, excessive changes by each government could violate the principle of legality asked by Constitution. In this sense, arbitrary modification with respect to the government structure by the newly elected government is not desirable. The long term stability of the government organization is required in any case. Secondly, general administrative agencies, other than Executive Ministries, should not be established under the direct order of the President without the control of the Prime Minister. A hierarchy of the executive branch (President->Prime Minister-> Executive Ministries) is stipulated in the Constitution. Establishing a hierarchy of President -> executive institution should be considered unconstitutional. Therefore, only the Presidential Secretariat and institutions with special functions can be established in the Presidential Office. Establishing general administrative agencies in the Presidential Office for convenience purposes is against the spirit of the current Constitution. Consequently, only the office of staffs and special agencies can be placed in the presidential office. It is against the spirit of the current Constitution to found administrative agencies under the presidential office for convenience. Thirdly, the office of the Prime Minister should be the backbone of internal affairs. In that sense, the President, as the head of state, should focus on the big picture such as the direction of the State, while the Cabinet headed by the Prime Minister should be responsible for the daily affairs of the State. The cabinet surrounding the Prime Minister must control all the ordinary affairs of the State, while the President, as the head of the State, should focus on the big picture of blueprinting the aim of the State. Lastly, the Office of the Prime Minister and Executive Ministries are the two main bodies of the executive branch. It is important to reduce the confusion caused by repeated changes in the names of Executive Ministries, to restore the traditional names and authorities of these institutions, and to rehabilitate the legitimacy of the State. For the Korean democracy to take its roots, a systematic way of stabilizing a law-governed democratic country is needed. There is also the need not only to reform security and economic agencies, but also to rationally solve the integration of technique and policy, according to the changes of time.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.49 no.1
• /
• pp.178-189
• /
• 2016

This essay explores the ways in which the philosophical concept of "original form" is expressed in relevant laws and regulations, the legal character of respective regulations, the way in which each regulation is applied in practice for heritage management, and the factors required for this concept to serve as a legally binding fundamental principle. The current laws and regulations on heritage maintain a consistent requirement for preserving the original form of heritage, both for the general public and for heritage professionals. However, the principle of preserving original form is expressed as a declaration or imperative without substantive definitions. Consequently, heritage administrators simply follow administrative procedures for heritage conservation, management, and promotion while failing to specify the meaning of "original form." For the practical application of the principle of preserving original form to overall heritage conservation activities as an actual legal principle, further provisions should be added for the purpose of clarifying the principle, with consideration given to the observation of fundamental principles for legal provisions, such as the principles of clarity, equality, and proportion. The principle of preserving original form still functions as the most necessary principle for heritage conservation and therefore should be reestablished as a refined and rational regulatory system.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.14 no.2
• /
• pp.49-80
• /
• 2013

The Issuance of false medical certificates on Criminal Law or the Medical Service Act are frequently applied to the insurance fraud cases related with the medical certificate, prescriptions. The meaning of medical certificate is not defined on the crime of Issuance of false medical certificates, but considering the rule of Paragraph 1 of Article 17 of the Medical Service Act, which punishes drawing up the medical certificate by anyone except the doctor who has directly examined, and the principle of legality, the medical certificate applied with the crime of Issuance of false medical certificates should (1) include the judgment after current medical ex-amination, (2) be written for the purpose of verifying the health status and (3) have a style that can be recognizable as medical document usually written by doctors. In addition, since there have been many argues on the range of application of the Paragraph 1 of Article 17 of the Medical Service Act, which generally regulates various kinds of documents such as medical certificates, prescriptions and others, which have different purpose and characters, the range of application of the clause above is needed to be interpreted strictly.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.21 no.2
• /
• pp.133-156
• /
• 2011

This paper is to analyze the legality in which the fraud rule allow the issuer of L/C or a court to disrupt the payment to the beneficiary under the deferred payment credit when the nominated bank for deferred payment undertaking made prepayment or negotiation before the maturity date and fraud is identified to be involved. Since the function of commercial L/C is to provide absolute assurance of payment to a beneficiary, the fraud rule based on fraud exception has been known as the negative factor which lead to the disruption of "principle of independence & abstraction" under the commercial L/C transactions. As a result, the fraud rule is necessary to limit the activities of fraudsters, but its scope must be carefully circumscribed so as not to deny commercial utility to an instrument that exists to serve as an assurance of payment. But the fraud itself has not been firmly established because it is inherently pliable in its concept. There are numerous contents to describe the application of fraud to the L/C transactions as a standard such as egregious fraud, intentional fraud, L/C fraud(omitted here), flexible fraud, and constructive fraud. And so the standard applicable to the commercial transaction as the fraud rule would be high or low depending upon the various standards of fraud.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.21 no.1
• /
• pp.69-105
• /
• 2020

In the health care system, medical fee payment is a very important and basic factor. The National Health Insurance Act adopted a contract system, and the content of the contract is to be determined the unit price per relative value scale. Accordingly, in the National Health Insurance system, the costs of health care benefits are adjusted each year according to inflation or changes in economic conditions. On the other hand, in the Medical Care Assistance system, the Medical Care Assistance Act does not prescribe the method of determining the medical payment, and all matters are delegated to the Minister of Health and Welfare. Accordingly, the Minister has adopted a fixed-payment system for hemodialysis treatment since 2001. A constitutional petition was filed in 2017 against this fixed-payment system, and the Constitutional Court rejected the petition in 2020. In this study, we examine the meaning and content of the medical fee payment system, focusing on the above constitutional petition case, and present three principles as constitutional limits on the system. The first of its principles is the principle of legality, the second is the principle of prohibition of comprehensive delegation, and the third is the principle of proportionality. From that point of view, There are many unconstitutional elements in the fixed-payment system on hemodialysis.

• Korean Journal of Social Welfare Studies
• /
• v.42 no.4
• /
• pp.239-262
• /
• 2011

The Korean government's recent large-scale termination and modification of welfare benefits revealed a procedural problem under the National Basic Living Security Act. Under the Act, welfare recipients have a legal right to make complaints only after the termination or modification is enforced; the Act fails to provide the recipients with an opportunity for a hearing before termination or modification, and this creates serious threats to the recipients, whose livelihoods are dependent on welfare benefits. Korean jurisprudence has adopted the due process of law principle. The principle originated from the due process in US jurisprudence, and Korea has applied it broadly to any government actions that restrict individuals' constitutional or legal rights. This paper reviews the termination or modification procedure under the Act with the lens of the due process principle and criticizes that the current law is not in compliance with the principle. In supporting that such termination and modification procedure infringes on welfare recipients' protected rights, this paper discusses two theories as to what rights are protected. First, termination or modification of welfare benefits can be considered as deprivation of property. The 'property' theory may be weak under Korean jurisprudence, because the concept of property under the Korean Constitution is narrowly construed. Second, this paper relies on the constitutional provision that recognizes "the right to a life worthy of human beings," which requires the State to guarantee minimum standard of living for all. As welfare recipients are deemed to receive benefits as a right under the Constitution, any deviation from the minimum requirement would constitute a violation of constitutional rights. In any case, termination or modification of welfare benefits that are concretized under the Act should be protected under the due process principle, because the principle would cover any government actions that restrict established legal rights. This paper argues that the procedural due process requires the recipients be guaranteed an opportunity to have a hearing before the termination or modification is enforced. An independent decision-maker should hear the proceedings, and the recipients should have an option to orally present their opinions in front of the decision-maker. The hearing process under the Administrative Procedures Act of Korea offers elements that would satisfy these procedural requirements. Thus, this paper concludes that the National Basic Living Security Act should be amended to adopt the hearing process under the Administrative Procedures Act in its termination and modification procedure.