RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색
다국어 입력

http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

예시)
  • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
  • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
닫기
    인기검색어 순위 펼치기

    RISS 인기검색어

      검색결과 좁혀 보기

      선택해제

      오늘 본 자료

      • 오늘 본 자료가 없습니다.
      더보기
      • 무료
      • 기관 내 무료
      • 유료
      • KCI등재

        임상시험과 환자를 위한 구체적 의료행위의 구분기준에 관한 고찰 -대법원 2010. 10. 14. 선고 2007다3162 판결에 대한 비판적 검토를 중심으로-

        강한철 ( Han Cheol Kang ) 서울대학교 법학연구소 2013 서울대학교 法學 Vol.54 No.1

        Decision No. 2007Da3162 held by the Korean Supreme Court on Oct. 14, 2010 established its own criteria for separating clinical trials from individual medical practices by legally defining “clinical trials” as “any human subject research whose safety and efficacy have not been sufficiently verified by knowledge and experiences at the time of commencement of the research”. According to this criteria, Off-Label Use of marketed pharmaceutical products could be considered as “clinical trial” if relevant safety and efficacy have not been sufficiently verified. However, current medical society has broadly taken advantage of Off-Label Use of marketed pharmaceutical products for the health of their patients. Furthermore such drug use cannot be interpreted as legally prohibited under any current regulations and even can be legally required considering physicians` responsibility to provide their best medical treatment to patients. Nevertheless, the Korean Supreme Court`s “sufficient verification of safety and efficacy” standard would impose on physicians not only excessive procedural burden such as preparation of clinical trial protocol and collection of relevant materials required under the KGCP for the Korean Food and Drug Administration`s clinical trial approval but also potential criminal punishment arising from not performing such procedural requirements under the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act, in case of Off-Label Use. Considering relevant regulations and preexisting case laws, advanced country`s practices, physicians` legal responsibility to provide their best medical treatment to patients, nature of medicine and appropriate scope of clinical trials, the Korean Supreme Court`s “sufficient verification of safety and efficacy” standard hardly seems to be proper construction of laws. In this context, the primary criteria for separating clinical trials from individual medical practices should be “the main purpose of provided medical activities”. And “the main purpose of provided medical services” can be determined based on review of various circumstantial aspects of such medical services` performances. The potential problems caused by reckless use of drugs whose safety and efficacy are not properly verified could be resolved by imposing strict professional duty of care on physicians, denying claims of relevant medical service fees and punishing drug manufactures who produce and distribute pharmaceutical products without relevant product licenses, not by unreasonably broadening definition of clinical trials to concrete medical practices for individual patients.

      연관 검색어 추천

      이 검색어로 많이 본 자료

      활용도 높은 자료

      해외이동버튼