일본 민사소송법상 “쟁점 및 증거정리절차”의 고찰을 통한 새로운 방향의 모색

박태신 한국민사소송법학회 2007 民事訴訟 : 韓國民事訴訟法學會誌 Vol.11 No.1

A Civil Proceedings Act was revised preparatory proceedings with a form to carry out necessarily(It has been usually called “a new model”). In other words, to support this, the above Act is revised, and it was enforced from 2002.7.1. The procedure is very useful for solving the civil problems. But in the comparison with other legal system, it`s very strict so it can lack in versatility for problems solving. Therefore, I thought to make this article to grope for a new direction and to find versatility of a system of our country through the actual situation about an equal system of other countries.For that purpose I have written “a rearranging procedure of an issue and evidence” of Japanese legal pretrial clause. Because firstly studying the Japane- se legal trial clause, I thought to do new direction grope through a new system and comparison of our country. And secondly Koerans system is very much the same with Japanese public speaking preparatory proceedings(an issue and contents for an evidence rearranging procedure). Koerans system is the differ- ence in Japanese system. Because Korean system is accepted as very stiff as for it`s understanding.However, in charge of a duty to accomplish a function of the compulsion, the public speaking preparatory proceedings is very important by an umpire process. But it`s important to prevent administration in a public speaking fixed date of waste of trail through this procedure again, but public speaking preparatory proceedings of other forms cannot still deny that it is worse by an admi- nistration manner of a judicial officier.Therefore, I agree that it enforces a rearragnging proceduere of an issue and evidence basically, and it is necessary to change public speaking preparatory proceedings process with a form of procedure by judgment of efficiency of the judicial officier than in principle administrative compulsion for this procedure of the Civil Proceedings Act.

醫療訴訟에 있어서 說明義務의 機能

朴泰信 연세법학회 1998 연세법학 Vol.5 No.1

醫療訴訟에서 患者側 訴訟技術의 分析

박태신 연세법학회 1998 연세법학 Vol.5 No.2

土地境界確定訴訟에 관한 考察

박태신 연세법학회 2000 연세법학 Vol.7 No.2

日本 民事訴訟法上 "判決以外의 訴訟終了"에 관한 考察

朴泰信 연세법학회 2001 연세법학 Vol.8 No.1

It is reality that an increasing number of disputes arising from civil affairs are solved through methods such as compromises or conciliation between both parties rather than through civil procedure. Even our civil lawsuit reformation process that has recently taken place has accommodated this fact and has made efforts to develop and improve these points. And as a mean to confront these facts squarely, we can see from our civil lawsuit reformation Article 145, Clause 219, Article 220, Clause 5 and Chapter 4 that these amendment has put its emphasize on methods of solving disputes through various solutions rather than depending on civil procedure and to understand these methods. Since this phenomena is not only restricted to our country the case study of our nearest neighbouring country, Japan has also been studied. In Japan, according to the actual applied cases of all civil disputes, over 50% of these lawsuits were solved through compromises and conciliation in the first hearing following the lawsuit completion and these number of settlement show that they are playing an important role in solving disputes and these results show traces that Japan has put great efforts to prepare various methods in solving civil disputes. Compared with these detailed efforts shown in Japan our law reformation remains only in the documentation stage and lacks various acceptance approach, court, etc. making us acknowledge the fact that our reformation is somewhat unsatisfactory. However, at a stage where the amendment has not been passed by the national assembly, more careful and profound investigation by the actual law practitioners and academic field is most needed to compare the civil lawsuits between both countries to come up with more appropriate, comprehensive and convenient dispute solving methods, which can also be said to be the purpose of this thesis.

임상시험비용에 대한 국민건강보험재정 지원에 관한 문제점 고찰

박태신 전북대학교 동북아법연구소 2019 동북아법연구 Vol.13 No.2

Advances in medical technology and medicine can lead to a healthier life, which makes it possible for people to live humanly. Clinical trials are indispensable for the development of such medical technology, which is costly as well as a lot of time and effort. Therefore, it is necessary to support the costs for clinical trials, and the current legislation supports the general expenses for public-directed researcher-led clinical trials in health insurance finance. However, while clinical trials are studies to confirm the safety and effectiveness of medical technology, National Health Insurance is a system for medical technologies that have been verified for safety and effectiveness. It means supporting the costs of clinical trials in health insurance finances is a problem that is not consistent with the health care system. Therefore, funding for clinical trials should be made with a separate fund rather than a health insurance fund. 의료기술이나 의약품의 발전이 이루어져야 사람들은 좀 더 건강한 삶을 누릴 수 있고, 이를 통해 인간다운 생활을 할 권리가 구현된다. 그리고 위와 같은 의료기술 등의 발전을 위해서는 임상시험은 필수적인데, 이는 많은 시간과 노력뿐만 아니라 상당한 비용이 소요된다. 따라서 임상시험에 소요되는 비용을 보전할 필요가 있고, 현행법령은 건강보험재정에서 원칙적으로 공익적 목적의 연구자주도 임상시험에 소요되는 통상적 비용을 건강보험재정에서 지원하고 있다. 그러나 임상시험은 의료기술 등의 안정성과 유효성을 확인하기 위한 연구이고, 국민건강보험은 위와 같은 임상시험을 통해 안전성과 유효성이 확인된 의료기술 등을 대상으로 보험재정 등을 고려해서 선택적으로 급여대상을 정하는 제도이므로 임상시험에 소요되는 비용을 건강보험재정에서 지원하는 것은 보건의료체계에 부합하지 않는 문제가 있다. 따라서 임상시험 비용지원은 건강보험재정이 아닌 별도의 기금을 마련해서 이루어져야 한다.

민사법

박태신 고시계사 2014 考試界 Vol.59 No.5

2021년 주요 의료판결 분석

박태신,유현정,이정민,조우선,정혜승 대한의료법학회 2022 의료법학 Vol.23 No.2

There were also many medical-related rulings in 2021, among which the rulings reviewed in this paper are as follows. The first relates to a case in which the medical record, which is the primary judgment data regarding the presence or absence of medical negligence, has been modified. The court judged whether there was negligence on the basis of the first written medical record without considering the contents of the medical record that was later modified. Next, the ruling on the case of asking for liability for damages for prescription of anti-obesity drugs recognized negligence related to prescription, but denied liability for property damage by denying a causal relationship, and recognized only alimony for violation of the duty of explanation. The a full-bench ruling on the scope of subrogation of the National Health Insurance Corporation, which subrogates the claims for compensation for medical expenses against the perpetrator of the patient, changed the existing precedent that had taken the 'deduction method after offsetting negligence' and judged it as 'the method of offsetting negligence after deduction'. In addition, in the ruling on whether or not there was negligence, the court was not bound by the medical record appraisal result. Lastly, in relation to the National Health Insurance Service's disposition of reimbursement for medical care benefit costs, we reviewed the ruling that discretion should be exercised even when a non-medical person makes a refund to a medical institution opened by a non-medical person. And we also reviewed the ruling that the scope of reimbursement for medical institutions jointly using facilities and manpower specifically should be determined. 2021년에도 의료와 관련된 많은 판결들이 있었는데, 그 중 본 논문에서 검토한 판결들은 다음과 같다. 먼저 진료기록 부실기재 및 변조 등과 주의의무위반 관련 판결은 의료과실 유무 등에 관한 일차적 판단자료인 진료기록이 사후에 수정된 사례에 관한 것으로 그 수정내용 및 수정시기에 비추어 사후에 수정된 진료기록 내용은 고려하지 않고 최초 작성된 진료기록을 토대로 과실 유무 판단을 하였다. 다음으로 비만치료약 처방 등에 대한 손해배상책임을 묻는 사례에 관한 판결은 처방과 관련한 과실을 인정하였으나 상당인과관계를 부정하여 재산상 손해배상책임을 부정하고, 설명의무위반에 따른 위자료만 인정하였다. 또한, 환자의 가해자에 대한 기왕치료비 손해배상채권을 대위하는 국민건강보험공단의 대위범위에 관한 전원합의체판결은 ‘과실상계 후 공제방식’을 취해온 기존 판례를 변경하여 ‘공제 후 과실상계방식’으로 대위 범위를 판단하여 피해자 보호를 도모하였다. 그리고 과실 유무에 관해 진료기록감정회신결과와 달리 판단한 판결은 과실유무 판단을 함에 있어 진료기록감정결과에 구속되는 것은 아니고 자유심증에 따라 판단한다는 입장에 따라 규범적으로 판단하였다. 마지막으로 국민건강보험공단의 요양급여비용환수처분과 관련해서는 비의료인이 개설한 의료기관에 대한 환수처분을 함에 있어서도 재량권을 행사해야 한다는 판결과 시설 및 인력을 공동이용한 의료기관에 대한 환수처분의 경우 그 환수범위를 세부적으로 판단해야 한다는 판결을 검토하였다.

日本 民事訴訟法의 새로운 展開 : 文書提出義務등을 中心으로

朴泰信 연세법학회 1997 연세법학 Vol.4 No.-

大學敎育과 高等考試

박태신 연세대학교 교육연구소 1998 연세교육포럼 Vol.- No.1