[치료비등][집42(1)민,135;공1994.4.15.(966),1071]
Whether or not a police officer under the Act on the Performance of Duties by Police Officers can be seen as delegation to a public health and medical institution for medical treatment to request emergency relief.
Even if a police officer requested a public health and medical institution to provide emergency relief to a person in need of emergency relief, and the public health and medical institution provided medical treatment therefrom, it cannot be deemed that the State and the public health and medical institution entrusted the State with providing medical treatment to the public health and medical institution and concluded a contract for medical treatment delegation with the consent of the public health
Article 4 of the Act on the Performance of Duties by Police Officers, Articles 680 and 688 of the Civil Act
The Korea National University of Education
Korea
Gwangju District Court Decision 92Na4297 delivered on December 10, 1992
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
The case shall be remanded to the Panel Division of the Gwangju District Court.
The defendant's grounds of appeal are examined.
According to the reasoning of the judgment below, on August 17, 191, 191, the deceased non-party: (a) intending to flicker and flicker his body within the Mayang Police Agency affiliated with the defendant, and (b) the police officers belonging to the defendant request the deceased non-party to take emergency relief measures by sending the deceased non-party to the 119 Rescue Hospital; (c) the above hospital was hospitalized for the purpose of maintaining the life of the deceased non-party; (d) on October 21, 1991, 21:30; (e) the deceased non-party was hospitalized for the purpose of maintaining the life of the deceased non-party; (e) the deceased non-party's flicker and flicker for suicide; (e) the deceased non-party's flick and flicker for the purpose of protecting the deceased non-party's body from the date of entrance to the above death; and (e) the court below acknowledged the deceased non-party's right to receive emergency relief measures without justifiable reasons.
However, according to the Act on the Performance of Duties by Police Officers, when a police officer finds a sick or wounded person who has no protector and is in need of emergency relief, he may request a public health or medical care institution or a public relief institution to provide emergency relief, and the public health or medical care institution or public relief institution in receipt of such request may not refuse emergency relief without any justifiable reason (Article 4(1) and (2) of the Act on the Performance of Duties by Police Officers, which does not provide that a person in need of emergency relief is a national office or the State bears the duty of emergency relief for a person in need of emergency relief. Thus, the police officer's request for emergency relief to a public health or medical care institution, and even if the public health or medical care institution provided emergency relief, it cannot be deemed that the State entrusted the treatment to a public health or medical care institution and the public health or medical care institution with the treatment delegation contract with the consent of the public health or medical care institution. As established by the court below, the court below's determination that the non-party's request for emergency relief was not affected by the non-party's legal reasoning.
Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the court below for a new trial and determination. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.
Justices Kim Yong-sik (Presiding Justice)