소위 「연명의료결정법」의 주요 내용과 현실적용에서 쟁점과 과제

Arguments about withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment was seen concluded according to the Mrs. Kim case (the Severance-Hospital -case). The Supreme Court of Korea proposed requirements of withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment for unconscious patients. ① No possibility of recovery and obvious fact that it will lead to death even if treatment is continued. ② Life-sustaining treatment can be refused if medical instructions were given by patients. If there was no medical instruction, it should depend on patient’s usual values and beliefs that if the patient were conscious and would choose to withdraw life-sustaining beliefs. However ③ this judgement should be decided by committee constituted with professional doctors. This judgement allowed the effect of advance directives which triggered further discussions. Although the Supreme Court of Korea suggested guidelines for withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment, the Constitutional Court of Korea ruled that dying patients who wants to refuse meaningless life-sustaining treatment is a matter of National Assembly’s legislative policy. Since the patient’s right should be protected on the grounds of human dignity and value. This ruling has set an important example for the side who wanted to enact the law about withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment. In addition the National Bioethics Committee of Korea TFT recommended legislation about life-sustaining treatment. Through this process “the patient’s decision to hospice, palliative care and dying process act (the sog. well-dying act)” was enacted. However, there are many problems to be solved. This paper will examine the problems of this legislation.