학술논문
의료과오에 관한 판례의 동향
이용수 82
- 영문명
- The Trend of Supreme Court s decisions on the medical malpractice
- 발행기관
- 한국민사법학회
- 저자명
- 김만오(Kim, Man-Oh)
- 간행물 정보
- 『민사법학』제27호, 299~347쪽, 전체 49쪽
- 주제분류
- 사회과학 > 사회과학일반
- 파일형태
- 발행일자
- 2005.03.31
8,680원
구매일시로부터 72시간 이내에 다운로드 가능합니다.
이 학술논문 정보는 (주)교보문고와 각 발행기관 사이에 저작물 이용 계약이 체결된 것으로, 교보문고를 통해 제공되고 있습니다.
국문 초록
영문 초록
The medical malpractice action is disadvantageous to the plaintiff as it involves special medical care and targets medical professionals. In this respect, the burden of proof on the negligence and causality needs to be lessened for the benefit of the plaintiff s just compensation. On the other hand, the balance of proof and the extent of the compensation should also be taken into consideration, so that the doctor does not perform a defensive medical care to avoid the risk of compensation. Above mentioned attitude will enable both the patient who suffered from the improper treatment to get compensated for his injuries, and the doctor to perform a proper medical care-the decrease of malpractice and the increase of sufficient explanation-without unreasonable and physical medical disputes. According to the Supreme Court s decisions, the patient takes the burden of proof on the medical negligence, the damage, and the causality. However, considering the special, discretionary, secret and inexplicable characteristics of the medical practice, the causality can be presumed either by accepting indirect facts, or by proving the close time-gap, the consistent region of the body, and the possibility of other causes combined with the general common sense. The obstruction of taking evidence can also be applied to ease the proof. But the doctor is not liable if he proves other cause of the improper result, the specialty of the human body, or the inevitability of the result. The limitation of the liability and the duty of explanation for the right of self-defense also adjusts the distribution of the damages. In a medical malpractice action, different conclusions in the different level or chamber of the courts can results in the distrust against the judicial system. Thus, the criteria on the medical negligence needs to be formed. To this end, the standard of medical practice as a medical common sense, or the empirical rule by which the medical negligence or strongly probable causality can be assumed need to be set. The criteria should be flexible in order to comprise the diverse criteria or principles, keeping pacing with the continuous development of the medical treatment and the specialty and individuality of it. The Courts should also crystallize a general principle on the legal issues in medical disputes so that the medical malpractice action can be more detailed and exquisite. Eventually, medical malpractice action will be settled with the duty of explanation and the limitation of the liability. Especially at this time when the extreme individualism prevails, and the cure of the patient is regarded more important than the cure of the disease itself, diverse duty of explanation is necessary to recover trust between the doctor and the patient to decrease the medical dispute.
목차
Ⅰ. 서론
Ⅱ. 의료과실의 입증
Ⅲ. 인과관계의 입증
Ⅳ. 설명의무
Ⅴ. 책임의 제한
Ⅵ. 결론
키워드
해당간행물 수록 논문
참고문헌
관련논문
사회과학 > 사회과학일반분야 BEST
더보기사회과학 > 사회과학일반분야 NEW
- The Current Situation, Problems and Solutions of China's Basic Legal System of Digital Economy under the Background of Global Digital Governance
- Persistence and Breakthrough: Opportunities, Missions and Challenges of School Sports Development Under the “Double Reduction” Policy
- Research on the Issue of Chinese Youth Subculture Group in the Phenomenon of “Economic Fever”
최근 이용한 논문
교보eBook 첫 방문을 환영 합니다!
신규가입 혜택 지급이 완료 되었습니다.
바로 사용 가능한 교보e캐시 1,000원 (유효기간 7일)
지금 바로 교보eBook의 다양한 콘텐츠를 이용해 보세요!