The medical practice does not always get a satisfatory result since the disease progress of patients are depended on patients' physical constitution and the doctors cannot control the outcomes about patients' physiological and biological reaction after the treatment. Moreover, the medical practice may bring wrong result fatalistically because of the unpredictablility of life. To demand for compensation of the damage to the doctors about these wrong result, the patient side holds the burden of proof that is between medical practice and demage, and there is damage from doctor's malpractice according to the accepted theory about the fundamental principle of distribution of the burden of proof. This falls not only under the liability of Tort Law, but also liability of Contract Law. However, the patient may be in difficult situation to prove the malpractice of doctors since he or she cannot recognize the facts because he or she was in unconscious while the medical practice was conducted, or they cannot judge precisely even though they recognize the facts. Nevertheless, the lawsuits against medical malpractice are the field that never achieves the equality of arms since the most of the evidence belong to the doctor's side. Hence, to maintain the principle of the equality of arms under the constitution, the theory leads to alleviate the burden of proof that patients hold. However, the doctors cannot be asked for the burden of proof that they conduct medical practice without errors. Because the doctors may experience difficulty to prove their innocence as the patients because of the unique characteristic that medical practices have. Therefore, the methods of the alleviation of the patient's burden of proof should have the equality of arms and the equal opportunity between the patients and the doctors with the evaluation of the justifiable interest from both the patients and the doctors. As the methods of the alleviation of the burden of proof, the alleviation of the demands and the degree of the burden of proof or resolutely the conversion of the burden may be considered. However, Recognizing the exception from general principle with converting the burden of proof is not proper in principle because the doctors may experience difficulty of the proof as the patients may have. If the difficulty of proof can be resolved by alleviating of the demands and the degree of the burden of proof, it is more desirable resolution rather than converting the burden of proof.
목차
I. 서론 II. 의료과오소송의 특징 1. 의료과오소송의 특수성 2. 의료과오소송과 입증의 곤란 III. 의료과오소송에 있어서 입증책임 1. 입증책임의 일반원칙과 입증책임 완화의 필요성 2. 입증책임완화이론 3. 입증방해론 IV. 결론 참고문헌 ABSTRACT
키워드
medical malpracticecompensation of the damageburden of proofalleviation of the burden of proof
대한의료법학회는 “법학계, 법조계, 의료계가 공동하여 의료법학의 학제적 연구와 판례 평석 등을 통하여 전문분야에 있어서의 법률문화 향상에 기여함을 그 목적”으로 하여 1994년 2월에 태동한 이후 1999년 4월 24일에 공식 출범한 이래 2006년 3월 30일 법무부 산하의 사단법인으로 등록된 세계적 수준의 순수 학술단체이다.