애스크로AIPublic Preview
← 학술논문 검색
학술논문의료법학2010.12 발행KCI 피인용 6

물리치료사의 업무범위와 의사의 지도권에 관한 법적 검토-청주지방법원 2010.2.3. 선고 2009노1317 판결

A Legal Review on Physical Therapists' Roles and Doctors' Superintendency

김한나(한양대학교); 김계현(연세대학교)

11권 2호, 337~361쪽

초록

In the case of Korea, both of modern medicine and oriental medicine are admitted as medical practices in the system. In other words, healthcare system is dualized. However, medical practice that corresponds to oriental medicine in Korea is substitution of medical practice in cases of foreign countries. For use of medical devices, it is provided only for doctors and medical technician relevant to use. Particularly, although oriental medicine is recognized as orthodox medicine in terms of the features of Korean medical system, superintendency of oriental doctors is not identical with that of doctors for use of medical devices and superintendency toward medical technicians. Recently, Cheongju District Court decided that superintendency of oriental doctor upon physical therapist is not acknowledged. It can be said that the judgement is opposed to the original verdict which judged that oriental doctors' employment and guidance of oriental doctors upon physical therapist is permissible. Hence this study aimed to review on domestic medical law system, which is dualized, roles of medical professionals, intent of the medical license system, provisions related to medical technician law and relevant precedents. Regulations on practices other than licensed practices by medical professionals are made because medical practices may affect on danger toward life and body of human and public health also. Therefore, the nation regulates medical professionals having licenses to perform medical practices within the range of the licenses. It is clearly prescribed that medical technicians may perform medical practices under instructions of doctors or dentists pursuant to the medical technician law. In addition, the court also judges that it is out of the license of oriental doctors if they use CT devices and limits the use of modern medical devices by oriental doctors. That is to say that it limits oriental doctors' employment of medical technicians and pursuant of oriental doctors on medical technicians as well.

Abstract

In the case of Korea, both of modern medicine and oriental medicine are admitted as medical practices in the system. In other words, healthcare system is dualized. However, medical practice that corresponds to oriental medicine in Korea is substitution of medical practice in cases of foreign countries. For use of medical devices, it is provided only for doctors and medical technician relevant to use. Particularly, although oriental medicine is recognized as orthodox medicine in terms of the features of Korean medical system, superintendency of oriental doctors is not identical with that of doctors for use of medical devices and superintendency toward medical technicians. Recently, Cheongju District Court decided that superintendency of oriental doctor upon physical therapist is not acknowledged. It can be said that the judgement is opposed to the original verdict which judged that oriental doctors' employment and guidance of oriental doctors upon physical therapist is permissible. Hence this study aimed to review on domestic medical law system, which is dualized, roles of medical professionals, intent of the medical license system, provisions related to medical technician law and relevant precedents. Regulations on practices other than licensed practices by medical professionals are made because medical practices may affect on danger toward life and body of human and public health also. Therefore, the nation regulates medical professionals having licenses to perform medical practices within the range of the licenses. It is clearly prescribed that medical technicians may perform medical practices under instructions of doctors or dentists pursuant to the medical technician law. In addition, the court also judges that it is out of the license of oriental doctors if they use CT devices and limits the use of modern medical devices by oriental doctors. That is to say that it limits oriental doctors' employment of medical technicians and pursuant of oriental doctors on medical technicians as well.

발행기관:
대한의료법학회
분류:
법학

AI 법률 상담

이 논문의 주제에 대해 더 알고 싶으신가요?

460만+ 법률 자료에서 관련 판례·법령·해석례를 찾아 답변합니다

AI 상담 시작
물리치료사의 업무범위와 의사의 지도권에 관한 법적 검토-청주지방법원 2010.2.3. 선고 2009노1317 판결 | 의료법학 2010 | AskLaw | 애스크로 AI