All
| TITLE | [Homicide, Abortion Requested in Business, Violation of the Medical Service Act]Supreme Court Decision 2003Do2780 Delivered on April 15, 2005 [full Text] |
|---|---|
| Summary | |
| [1] Whether the fetus is dead or not as a result of an abortion surgery should affect the establishment of the crime of abortion (negative) [2] The case holding that the decision of the court below should be accepted, where the defendant, an obstetrician, conducted abortion by means of labor induction with medicine, but the fetus survived and was born as a premature baby; and where the defendant then injected the baby with potassium chloride to kill the baby, the obstetrician's criminal intent for murder has been recognized [3] The meaning of ""a case where the maintenance of pregnancy is or has a possibility of significantly damaging the health of the mother for medical reasons"" as stipulated in Article 14 (1) 5 of the Mother and Child Act [4] Whether making a patient enter into a contract of medical treatment by suggesting and promising an illegal medical treatment could come under ""enticing"" as stipulated in Article 25 (3) of the Medical Service Act (affirmative) [5] The case holding that the defendant, an obstetrician whose act of suggesting that the patient should visit the defendant's clinic while promising that he could conduct illegal abortion during counseling on the abortion through the communication of his internet homepage should be deemed to be included in the act of ""enticing"" as stipulated in Article 25 (3) of the former Medical Service Act | |
