의료기사에 대한 지도 권한의 법적 체계와 입법적 개선 방향 -한국․일본 비교법적 고찰을 중심으로-

In current legislation and judicial precedents, the concept of medical guidance authority appears under various terms, including a physician’s “guidance,” “specific instructions,” “supervision,” “medical guidance,” and “direct command and control.” It provides the legal basis for non-medical personnel to perform medical acts without thereby constituting the unlicensed practice of medicine, while also defining the scope of such permitted acts. Among the professions subject to a physician’s medical guidance authority, medical technicians are defined as “persons engaged in diagnostic or clinical chemistry examinations under the supervision of a physician or dentist.” Due to this central role, the scope and function of medical guidance authority have been the subject of ongoing legislative debate, particularly regarding reforms to the medical technician framework and the Medical Technicians Act. This paper examines the legal structure and practices governing medical technicians, highlighting deficiencies in the current supervisory framework and the frequent performance of technician‐level medical acts by unlicensed personnel. In Japan, eleven categories of medical technicians are regulated under separate qualification statutes, with the holders of supervisory authority clearly designated and duties classified into levels of supervision—no instruction, specific instruction, or general guidance. By contrast, South Korea regulates six categories under a single statute, yet certain medical acts are still performed by individuals who are neither licensed medical professionals nor medical technicians, underscoring the need to expand and clarify supervisory authority. This study identifies legal and structural shortcomings in South Korea’s supervisory authority over medical technicians, proposes statutory amendments to the definition of medical technicians, and makes policy recommendations for reform. It further advocates incorporating technician‐equivalent activities currently performed by unlicensed personnel into the legal framework, through both the recognition of selected private certifications and the creation of new medical technician categories.