한방 의료행위의 개념과 그 한계 - 법령과 판례를 중심으로 -

Objectives : The purpose of this study is to suggest how to interpret the ‘practice of Korean Medicine’, differentiating it from ‘medical practice’. Methods : I analyze the legislations and precedents regarding the practice of Korean Medicine. Results : The Korean Medicine and Pharmaceutics Promotion Act defines ‘practice of Korean Medicine’ and it clearly differentiates it from the definition of ‘medical practice’. However, the scope of this definition is somewhat restricting and it can violate doctors of Korean Medicine’s right to equality and their academic freedom. Thus, the application of this definition of the ‘practice of Korean Medicine’ should be limited to the field of research and development. Meanwhile, criteria of distinguishing ‘practice of Korean Medicine’ from ‘medical practice’, which used to make a sharp distinction between Medicine and Korean Medicine by rigorously applying their academic standards, are now focusing more on protecting and improving health of the people. Discussions & Conclusions : I suppose that the distinction between the ‘practice of Korean Medicine’ and ‘medical practice’ will be more focused on public health rather than the academic stance of those two medical fields. Meanwhile, in accordance with dualistic medical system, the mutual usage of medical equipment in the area of ‘treatment’ should be limited while it should be allowed in the area of ‘diagnosis’ if it satisfies requirements suggested by the Constitutional Court.