비급여의료에 관한 환자유인행위의 판단기준에 관한 고찰

In Korea's health insurance system, non-benefit medical care is distinguished from patients sharing of the medical cost, and there is a specificity such that a health care provider arbitrarily adjusts the amount. However, in the case of decisions of the Supreme Court and Constitutional Court, even if it is found that the problem of non-benefit medical care, in judging patient solicitation, to be banned under the medical law, they considered how Medical care providers or medical institutions provide benefits to patients. It is necessary to discuss whether any of these judgments are appropriate in point of the interpretation of the prestigious regulations of the medical law. In particular, in the case of an appeal for commercial purpose, the interpretation should be in accordance with the principle of legality. The interpretation of the fact that it corresponds to the patients sharing of the medical cost which is regulated in Article 27 (3) of the Medical Law up to the non-benefit medical care is an extension of the text of the punishment regulation excessively and does not conform to tprinciple of legality. Even if it is directly discounted the price for non-benefit medical care by health care provider and has the appearance of the patient incentive act prohibited in Article 27 (3) of the Medical Law, if it turns out to be non-benefit medical care, it is no longer necessary to examine the additional criteria related to Article 27 (3) of the Medical Law.