2024년 주요 의료판결 분석

In 2024, a number of noteworthy court rulings were issued in the field of cosmetic surgery. In particular, a landmark decision was rendered that addressed the legal nature of cosmetic procedures performed solely for aesthetic purposes. Alongside developments in the cosmetic surgery sector, there has been a noticeable increase in cases involving psychiatry, whereas obstetric cases have shown a declining trend due to the falling birth rate and the decreasing number of obstetric clinics and hospitals. In obstetric malpractice cases where negligence is recognized, several rulings have acknowledged the need for newborn care expenses even before the child reaches the age of five. These decisions are seen as meaningful in light of the growing burden of childcare in society. The legal doctrine regarding the duty of explanation has continued to evolve with increasing specificity. When a medical act falls outside the scope of a physician’s discretion, both medical negligence and violation of the duty to explain have been recognized, and some courts have even acknowledged a causal link between the breach of this duty and the entire extent of the resulting damage. In light of the growing number of same-sex partners, a case recognizing a same-sex partner as a dependent under the National Health Insurance Act carries particular significance. The year 2024 also brought considerable challenges due to the so-called “medical crisis” triggered by the government’s announcement of the Essential Medical Services Package. The staffing shortages in hospitals led to delays in essential processes such as the provision of medical records and physical examinations in medical malpractice litigation. In addition, due to a strike by resident doctors, the number of surgeries performed at tertiary hospitals significantly declined, which likely contributed to a temporary reduction in medical disputes. Amid this atmosphere, the Nursing Act was passed, and the Supreme Court overturned a lower court’s decision that had convicted a nurse of violating the Medical Service Act for performing a bone marrow aspiration for diagnostic purposes, remanding the case with a finding of not guilty. This ruling highlights the need for clearer legal standards regarding the scope of professional responsibilities between physicians and nurses in the future.