beta
Text
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, KRW 75,846 against the Plaintiff and its related thereto from April 30, 2014 to June 15, 2016.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is an insurer of the health insurance established under the National Health Insurance Act (hereinafter “Act”). The Defendant is a person who has operated the “B” of the health care institution in the Jeonsi-gu Seoul Metropolitan City under Article 42(1)1 of the Act.
B. As indicated in the attached list, the Defendant issued to the patients a prescription that violates the medical care benefits standards stipulated in Article 41(2) and (3) of the National Health Insurance Act and the Regulations on the Standards for Medical Care Benefits in National Health Insurance.
C. The Plaintiff paid KRW 108,020 as medical care benefits equivalent to medicine costs to a pharmacy that prepared medicine according to an out-of-the-counter prescription that violates the medical care benefit standard issued by the Defendant.
[Ground for recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The parties' assertion
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Defendant’s act of issuing a prescription in violation of the medical care benefit standard constitutes an unlawful act. Accordingly, the Plaintiff caused damage to the medical care benefit cost corresponding to the medicine cost, and thus, the Defendant is liable to compensate for such damage. (2) Although the medical care benefit standard was changed from time to time according to new medical technology or new medicine development, the rule on the medical care benefit standard was enacted pursuant to Article 41(2) and (3) of the Act, and it does not take
B. The Defendant’s assertion 1) The medical care benefit standards are comprehensively prescribed based on policy standards, and they cannot be known as any change from time to time, and the Defendant is not illegal as having prescribed the best duty to treat patients even if the medical care benefit standards are violated.2) Since the pharmaceutical industry, medical personnel do not have any profit from the prescription act, and if a pharmacy is liable for damages, it is more responsible for the pharmacy’s liability.
3. Determination
A. The Plaintiff’s wife, who deviates from the medical care benefit standard in relation to the occurrence of liability for damages, either.