logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2014.12.19 2014노1393
의료법위반
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. In preparing a summary of the grounds for appeal pursuant to Article 22(1) of the Medical Service Act, a medical person shall make a record of the patient’s condition and progress of the treatment without omitting information, and make it available for the patient’s continuous treatment after the recording, provide other persons engaged in the medical service with such information so that the patient can be provided with appropriate medical care, and after the completion of the medical practice, use such information as data to determine the propriety of the medical practice;

However, the Defendant did not state whether the PPC was included in the medical records of F, and the content of dilution, etc. in the medical records of F, even though it was mixed with libers in the process of PPC (Phosp, lchline, hereinafter referred to as the “PPC”).

The defendant's failure to state information about Libya in the medical records violates Article 22 (1) of the Medical Service Act.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and misapprehending the legal principles, and by misapprehending the remaining facts charged, acquitted the Defendant.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged is the intention to operate the “E” hospital in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D.

A medical doctor may use the patient's continuous medical treatment, provide other medical persons with appropriate information, and record in detail to the extent sufficient to determine the appropriateness of the medical treatment after the completion of the medical treatment.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, from around December 28, 201 to November 26, 2012, performed pPC injection operations to 19 times with respect to F who moved to the above hospital as a patient, and performed pPC medication for the decentralization of telegraph and telegraph, and performed injection by mixing the State anesthesia for the relaxation of pain. However, even though the Defendant was in charge of injection by mixing the State anesthesia, the Defendant’s mixture of drugs and administered them.

arrow