수의사의 설명의무에 관한 연구 -이론적 근거, 손해배상의 범위를 중심으로-

This article aims to propose some ideas concerning informed consent in veterinary malpractice. The key arguments are as follows: First, it is appropriate to recognize informed consent based on property rights protection. The aim of informed consent is different in the veterinary and medical contexts. The purpose of veterinary informed consent is to protect an owner’s property rights whereas medical informed consent aims to protect a patient’s right to make an autonomous decision as to his or her body. Second, there should be a causal relationship between lack of informed consent and an animal patient’s injury. In other words, the owner of companion animals would have decided against the treatment if the owner had obtained the material information related to the therapy. The owner of companion animals should be entitled to compensation for economic damages and consolation once causation can be proven. Third, it is necessary to consider specific information to establish causation. For instance, alternative treatments, interactive risks, and cost could be the key issues to determine whether there is a causal link between lack of informed consent and an animal patient’s injury.