logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2014.08.12 2014고정1498
의료법위반
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

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

A doctor may use matters concerning medical treatment, such as the condition of a patient and the progress of medical treatment, and the opinion thereof for the continuous treatment of a patient, provide other medical persons with appropriate information, and shall record in detail to the extent sufficient to determine the appropriateness of the medical act after the completion of the medical act.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, from around December 28, 201 to November 26, 2012, performed 19 times a PPC (Phosp Shosidylchline) injection for the impreging of clothes and telegraphic local decomposition with respect to F who moved to the above hospital as a patient, and did not enter whether to mix and administer the relevant drugs, the volume of medication, and the patient's symptoms therefrom in the medical records.

2. Article 22(1) of the Medical Service Act provides that “A medical person shall keep the records of medical treatment, assistance in child delivery, nursing records, and other records concerning medical treatment (hereinafter “medical records, etc.”) and shall record and sign the matters and opinions pertaining to his/her medical practice in detail.” The purport of allowing a medical person to prepare medical records is to allow a medical person in charge of medical treatment to make accurate records, without omitting information about the patient’s condition and progress of medical treatment and to allow him/her to use them for continuous patient treatment, as well as allowing another medical person to provide such information so that he/she can be provided with appropriate medical treatment, and after the completion of his/her medical practice, he/she can use them as data to determine the propriety of the medical practice.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 97Do1234, Aug. 29, 1997). Medical records recorded by the Defendant are as mentioned above.

arrow