• The Journal of Korean Medical History
• /
• v.23 no.1
• /
• pp.105-113
• /
• 2010

Seungjeongwon Ilgi["承政院日記"], the Diaries of Royal Secretariat of the Joeson Dynasty is the most massive compilation of records in Korean history. Medical records in Seungjeongwon Ilgi have been studied but the procedures of clinical discussion[議藥] have not yet been studied. In this paper, main agents of clinical discussion, formation of participant doctor system, particularity of clinical discussion in Royal Court and problems derived from it will be discussed. Main agents of clinical discussion were court doctors[內醫], royal doctors[御醫] and participant doctors[議藥同參]. The king himself decided ultimately as a matter of form. Head of the Medical Dpt. of the Palace[藥房都提調] was in charge of attending to king, but head of the court doctor[首醫] led the actual discussion of deciding treatment. The Medical Dpt. of the Palace[內醫院] was divided into three sectors-court doctor division, acupuncture doctor division and participant doctor division. Palace doctors payed a great attention to avoid serious error. This tendency led them occasionally to passive management. Sometimes aggressive treatment is needed in the course of treating disease, but palace doctors tended to choose slow and gradual methods. It induced minor conflict between palace doctors and participant doctors from outside palace, because doctors from outside palace subordinated effectiveness. Their opinion had not been always recognized by court doctors. However, their role was meaningful because they provided flexibility to the rigidity of clinical discussion in the palace. It is important to evaluate clinical records in Seungjeongwon Ilgi["承政院日記"]. If we have broader eye on the clinical procedure in the palace, we can estimate the value of the contents more objectively and accurately.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.24 no.3
• /
• pp.125-153
• /
• 2023

The Supreme Court's en banc decision on December 12, 2022 (docket number 2016Do21314) presented a new standard for determining whether the use of diagnostic medical devices by Korean medical doctors constitutes oriental medical doctors constitutes unlicensed medical practice. Based on this standard, it was determined that the use of ultrasound by Korean medical doctors was not an unlicensed medical practice. Supreme Court's Decision 2016Du51405 on August 18, 2023, is the first case in which a new standard was applied to determine that an Korean medical doctor's use of electroencephalography to diagnose Parkinson's disease and dementia was not an unlicensed medical practice. The Supreme Court abolished the previous standard that Western medical knowledge and technology should not be required for Korean medical doctors to use medical devices. However, it was unclear whether Western medical diagnosis of Korean medical doctors using diagnostic medical devices would be viewed as an an auxiliary method of diagnosis. Parkinson's disease and dementia are Western medical diagnoses. The Supreme Court judged that the Western medical diagnosis of Korean medical doctors was not an unlicensed medical practice. This clearly explains what an auxiliary method of diagnosis means. In addition, the Supreme Court excluded the principles of development and production of electroencephalography from its judgment criteria. Automatic extraction and automatic reading of test results were also excluded. The criminal court's view that the meaning of oriental medical practice should be clearly and strictly interpreted from the perspective of an oriental doctor, and it was clarified that diagnostic medical devices were excluded from criminal punishment unless it was clear that they were not related to the principle of oriental medical practice. As a result, the Supreme Court made it clear that the use of diagnostic medical devices is excluded from criminal punishment unless it is clear that they are not related to the principles of Korean medicine.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.11 no.2
• /
• pp.337-361
• /
• 2010

In the case of Korea, both of modern medicine and oriental medicine are admitted as medical practices in the system. In other words, healthcare system is dualized. However, medical practice that corresponds to oriental medicine in Korea is substitution of medical practice in cases of foreign countries. For use of medical devices, it is provided only for doctors and medical technician relevant to use. Particularly, although oriental medicine is recognized as orthodox medicine in terms of the features of Korean medical system, superintendency of oriental doctors is not identical with that of doctors for use of medical devices and superintendency toward medical technicians. Recently, Cheongju District Court decided that superintendency of oriental doctor upon physical therapist is not acknowledged. It can be said that the judgement is opposed to the original verdict which judged that oriental doctors' employment and guidance of oriental doctors upon physical therapist is permissible. Hence this study aimed to review on domestic medical law system, which is dualized, roles of medical professionals, intent of the medical license system, provisions related to medical technician law and relevant precedents. Regulations on practices other than licensed practices by medical professionals are made because medical practices may affect on danger toward life and body of human and public health also. Therefore, the nation regulates medical professionals having licenses to perform medical practices within the range of the licenses. It is clearly prescribed that medical technicians may perform medical practices under instructions of doctors or dentists pursuant to the medical technician law. In addition, the court also judges that it is out of the license of oriental doctors if they use CT devices and limits the use of modern medical devices by oriental doctors. That is to say that it limits oriental doctors' employment of medical technicians and pursuant of oriental doctors on medical technicians as well.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.13 no.1
• /
• pp.199-247
• /
• 2012

According to the review and analysis of medical cases that are assigned to the Supreme Court and all local High Court in 2011 and that are presented in the media, it was found that the following categories were taken seriously, medical and pharmaceutical product liability, the third principle of trust between medical institutions, negligence and causation estimation, responsibility limit, the meaning of medical records and related judgment of disturbed substantiation, Oriental doctors' duties to explain the procedures, IMS events, whether one can claim for each medical care operated by non-physician health care institutions to the nonmedical domain in the National Health Insurance Corporation, and the basis of norms for each claim. In the cases related to medical pharmaceutical product liability, Supreme Court alleviated burden of proof for accidents with medical and pharmaceutical products prior to the practice of Product Liability Law and onset the point of negative prescription as the time of damage strikes to condition feasibility of the specific situation. In the cases related to the 3rd principle of trust between medical institutions, the Supreme Court refused to sentence the doctor who has trusted the judgment of the same third-party doctors the violations of the care duty. With respect to proof of a causal relationship and damages in a medical negligence case, the Supreme Court decided that it is unjust to deny negligence by the materials of causal relationship rejecting the original verdict and clarified that the causal relationship shall not deny the reasons to limit doctors' responsibilities. In order not put burden on patients with disadvantages in which medical records and the description of the practice or the most fundamental and important evidence to prove negligence and causation are being neglected, the Supreme Court admitted in the hospital's responsibility for the case of the neonate death of suffocation without properly listed fetal heart rate and uterine contraction monitor. On the other hand, the Seoul Western District Court has admitted alimony for altering and forging medical records. With respect to doctors' obligations to description, the Supreme Court decided that it is necessary to explain the foreseen risks by the combination of oriental and western medicines emphasizing the right of patient's self-determination. However, questions have arisen whether it is realistically feasible or not. In a case of an unlicensed doctor performing intramuscular stimulation treatment (IMS), the Supreme Court put off its decision if it was an unlicensed medical practice as to put limitation of eastern and western medical practices, but it declared that IMS practice was an acupuncture treatment therefore the plaintiff's conduct being an illegal act. In the future, clear judgment on this matter should be made. With respect to the claim of bills from non-physical health care institutions, the Supreme Court decided to void it for the implementation of the arrangement is contrary to the commitments made in the medical law and therefore, it is invalid to claim. In addition, contrast to the private healthcare professionals, who are subject to redemption according to the National Healthcare Insurance Law, the Seoul High Court explicitly confirmed that the non-professionals who receive the tort operating profit must return the unjust enrichment and have the liability for damages. As mentioned above, a relatively wide range of topics were discussed in medical field of 2011. In Korea's health care environment undergoing complex changes day by day, it is expected to see more diverse and in-depth discussions striding out to the development in the field of health care.

• The Journal of the Korean dental association
• /
• v.58 no.4
• /
• pp.251-262
• /
• 2020

Until recently, dentistry did not show notable social conflicts with other medical professionals. This means that conflicts did not surface as medical doctors took the dominant position even though areas of intervention have been overlapped. The recent conflict between medical professionals, which began with clashes in the area of oral and maxillofacial surgery, have been embodied in the Supreme Court ruling on the use of Botox by dentists and the court ruling on the use of oral devices in oriental medicine. We look discuss at each case in detail to seek a solution to the problem of interprofessional conflict. We present professional duty of self-development and interprofessional education as a way to resolve disputes between medical professionals, which would be a major problem in the future of dentistry and medicine.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Physical Medicine
• /
• v.13 no.2
• /
• pp.147-156
• /
• 2018

PURPOSE: The law pertaining to medical service technologists does not discuss the scope and limits of doctors' guidelines. My paper aims to discuss these topics. METHODS: This study was based on a review of literature and an analysis of judicial precedents. RESULTS: Physical therapists have often noted the need for independent practitioners in their articles on health care. Their continued discussions on professional and educational differences have centered round this issue, but their ideas have not been accepted. Practitioners have continued to interpret doctors' guidelines in hospitals without discussing their scope. However, the Supreme Court presented a meaningful decision outlining the conceptual limits and the scope of medical practice. The court suggested, basing its interpretation in the goal of clarifying the concept of medical activities smoothly, was to follow a specific judgment on the levels of education, testing, and professionalism. CONCLUSION: The role of physical therapists is expanding in this country, in order to meet the needs of the ultra-aged society. Education is already responding to rising training needs. By dividing the doctors' guidelines into indirect and direct types, if there's no medical risk near or around the health center or hospital, it is a good idea to allow the management of physical therapy partially, while understanding the scope and limitations of these guidelines clearly. A teleological interpretation of the law is especially relevant, and can be implemented immediately by the authoritative interpretation on part of the health authorities without any legal amendments.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.16 no.2
• /
• pp.131-157
• /
• 2015

NHIS claimed for damages to doctors that by doing the treatment breaching medical insurance criteria caused by doctors, NHIS paid for medicine cost to pharmacy; as a result, the doctors caused the tort to NHIS. Following consecutive rulings afterwards, NHIS also argued that the medicine cost violating medical law or medical treatment expense paid to medical organizations are both the tort in civil law. NHIS claimed for all the damages, and the Supreme Court confirmed this judgment. However, within our national health insurance system, the subject of insurance payment is NHIS and the subject of medical treatment expense are also NHIS since the treatment expense is also insurance payment by asking the treatment to medical organizations. Further, national health insurance law is not made to control the violation of medical treatment cases; therefore, the breach of medical law cannot be covered by illegality of tort in civil law regarding NHIS. If that is the case, in the case that if the patients are treated according to treatment criteria via the doctors delegated the doctors' permission by Health and Welfare minister, NHIS acquired the benefits to remove the duty to give treatment payment to doctors in civil law; thus, even though the doctors have breached the medical law, NHIS does not have any damages. The fact that supreme court confirmed the ruling that the treatment is the tort in civil law towards NHIS is the judgment not counting the benefits of insurance payment as the subject but only considering the fact that NHIS paid to the doctors and this ruling have gone against the principle under civil code section 750. If the doctors have breached the medical law, the case should be sanctioned by medical law not national health insurance law, and the ruling of supreme court is assumed that they have confused both with the principle of national health insurance law and civil law.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.22 no.1
• /
• pp.3-23
• /
• 2021

Telemedicine is a field of medicine in which medicine doctors who are in remote distance can treat the patients using audio, video devices which can help the diagnosis. In medicine, even the face-to-face diagnosis and treatment is the traditional way, the telemedicine could provide the convenient way for the patients in long distance, disabled or anyone who want to be stay ones' home. But telemedicine has the task to maintain the quality of medical cares compare with the traditional medicine. Among the several types of telemedicine, the specific type telemedicine in which the medicine doctors examine, diagnosis and do the prescription to the remotely distanced patients could be defined tele-prescription. Under The Medical Service act, it is unclear that teleprescription could be allowed. The Medical Service Act has introduced the specific clause for the prescription. That clause includes the duty of patients who have to receive the prescriptions directly from medical doctors. Under this clause, the constitutional court had decided the tele-prescription was illegal, but the supreme court has been decided tele-prescription could be legalized under the certain circumstances. But the other supreme court decided the tele-prescription was illegal under the article 34 of presenting Medical Service Act. So to understand the interpretations of Supreme court and Constitutional court decisions for the cases of prescription via telephone, we need to understand the history and presented reasons for the revision of prescription clause and also need to understand the other related clauses in the same act. In conclusion, To consider the values of telemedicine should be the level with the ordinary treatments, It is reasonable to interpret that the presenting Medical Service Act only legalize the telemedicine between doctor to doctor and which is regulated by the telemedicine clause.

• Journal of Acupuncture Research
• /
• v.29 no.4
• /
• pp.71-79
• /
• 2012

Objectives : The purpose of this study is to set the explanatory duty on traditional Korean medical(TKM) treatment by analyzing the judicial precedents. Methods : The study was performed by analyzing nine cases of lawsuits related to Korean medicine doctor and explanatory duty among the medical dispute cases in Korea from 1968 through 2012. Results : Nine closed claims occurred regarding the violation of explanatory duties in the field of TKM practice. Two claims were decided by supreme court, three were decided by high court, and four were decided by district court. The causes of lawsuits were categorized as follows : bee venom pharmacopuncture, herb treatment, and an explanation for safety. Conclusions : To perform an explanatory duty has important legal implications for the protection of patients' rights and Korean Medicine doctors' autonomy on TKM treatment.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.12 no.2
• /
• pp.123-158
• /
• 2011

The Korea health care system has been divided into Western and Oriental (Korea traditional) medicine since 1951. In accordance with dualistic medical system, there are many conflict cases between medical doctors and oriental medical doctors. Meanwhile, there were much discussions about the meaning and criteria of medical malpractice(negligence). Especially, many cases have been built up about the criteria of medical malpractice through lawsuits. But, comparatively, there's few the medical malpractice case of the oriental medical doctors. According to a recent ruling of the Supreme Court, the legal principles of medical doctor's malpractice case are equally applied to the criteria of the oriental medical doctor's malpractice case. But there are much considerations in addition to these principles for the dualistic medical system and academic distinctiveness. This study is intended to review the dualistic medical system, the criterion of medical malpractice, and analysis this issues. To make long story short, under our dualistic medical system, judging the medical and oriental malpractice should be considered relatively. However, it makes sense that we want medical doctor or oriental medical doctor to demand the reinforced negligence to restrict the unnecessary discretion. If there is lack of evidence-based medicine or the rationality suspected, the health care providers must give enough proof.