On Concurrence of Justification Excuse about Emergency Surgery Treatment
碩士 === 國立臺北大學 === 法律學系一般生組 === 100 === This dissertation disscuss the “emergency surgery treatment” of medical behavior. Due to the scope of emergency surgery treatment is wide. Firstly, defining the “emergency injured patient ” and the “emergency surgery treatment” in chapter 2. For the reason the...
Main Authors: | , |
---|---|
Other Authors: | |
Format: | Others |
Language: | zh-TW |
Published: |
2012
|
Online Access: | http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/25835935978845759125 |
id |
ndltd-TW-100NTPU0194023 |
---|---|
record_format |
oai_dc |
spelling |
ndltd-TW-100NTPU01940232015-10-13T21:12:26Z http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/25835935978845759125 On Concurrence of Justification Excuse about Emergency Surgery Treatment 急救手術行為阻卻違法事由之競合 Huang, Hsin Yi 黃馨儀 碩士 國立臺北大學 法律學系一般生組 100 This dissertation disscuss the “emergency surgery treatment” of medical behavior. Due to the scope of emergency surgery treatment is wide. Firstly, defining the “emergency injured patient ” and the “emergency surgery treatment” in chapter 2. For the reason the emergency surgery treatment is most involved the constitutive requirements of criminal law. Seperating this concept for three parts-- intention, negligence,Non-Interference particularizing at chpter3,4,5 will easier to know the concept of constitutive requirements and justification excuse possibility involved of the criminal law. In chpater3, disscuss that all the emegency surgery treament is “intended” and negligence is inexistent. Then using case study disscuss the justification excuses about the intended constitutive requirements such as: An act performed in accordance with law or order, A proper act performed in the course of business, An act performed by a person in defence of his own rights, For the third person avert imminent danger, The promise by the victim, Conjecturable promise by the victim. In chapter4, distinguishing the concept of “medical obligation” and “necessary medical obligation” and exampling the case about emergency surgery treatment with both “negligence constitutive requirement” and “aggravated result constitutive requirement ” In chapter5, defining the “suretyship” of Non-Interference emergerncy surgery treatment and continue using case study compare the constitutive requirement of “intended” medical treatment withhold. At last disscuss about the justification excuse within “obligation conflict” and “ the third person avert imminent danger”. Conclude all the researching in Chapter6, and suggest for the practice of medical litigation nowadays. Cheng, Yat Che 鄭逸哲 2012 學位論文 ; thesis 70 zh-TW |
collection |
NDLTD |
language |
zh-TW |
format |
Others
|
sources |
NDLTD |
description |
碩士 === 國立臺北大學 === 法律學系一般生組 === 100 === This dissertation disscuss the “emergency surgery treatment” of medical behavior. Due to the scope of emergency surgery treatment is wide. Firstly, defining the “emergency injured patient ” and the “emergency surgery treatment” in chapter 2. For the reason the emergency surgery treatment is most involved the constitutive requirements of criminal law. Seperating this concept for three parts-- intention, negligence,Non-Interference particularizing at chpter3,4,5 will easier to know the concept of constitutive requirements and justification excuse possibility involved of the criminal law.
In chpater3, disscuss that all the emegency surgery treament is “intended” and negligence is inexistent. Then using case study disscuss the justification excuses about the intended constitutive requirements such as: An act performed in accordance with law or order, A proper act performed in the course of business, An act performed by a person in defence of his own rights, For the third person avert imminent danger, The promise by the victim, Conjecturable promise by the victim.
In chapter4, distinguishing the concept of “medical obligation” and “necessary medical obligation” and exampling the case about emergency surgery treatment with both “negligence constitutive requirement” and “aggravated result constitutive requirement ”
In chapter5, defining the “suretyship” of Non-Interference emergerncy surgery treatment and continue using case study compare the constitutive requirement of “intended” medical treatment withhold. At last disscuss about the justification excuse within “obligation conflict” and “ the third person avert imminent danger”.
Conclude all the researching in Chapter6, and suggest for the practice of medical litigation nowadays.
|
author2 |
Cheng, Yat Che |
author_facet |
Cheng, Yat Che Huang, Hsin Yi 黃馨儀 |
author |
Huang, Hsin Yi 黃馨儀 |
spellingShingle |
Huang, Hsin Yi 黃馨儀 On Concurrence of Justification Excuse about Emergency Surgery Treatment |
author_sort |
Huang, Hsin Yi |
title |
On Concurrence of Justification Excuse about Emergency Surgery Treatment |
title_short |
On Concurrence of Justification Excuse about Emergency Surgery Treatment |
title_full |
On Concurrence of Justification Excuse about Emergency Surgery Treatment |
title_fullStr |
On Concurrence of Justification Excuse about Emergency Surgery Treatment |
title_full_unstemmed |
On Concurrence of Justification Excuse about Emergency Surgery Treatment |
title_sort |
on concurrence of justification excuse about emergency surgery treatment |
publishDate |
2012 |
url |
http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/25835935978845759125 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT huanghsinyi onconcurrenceofjustificationexcuseaboutemergencysurgerytreatment AT huángxīnyí onconcurrenceofjustificationexcuseaboutemergencysurgerytreatment AT huanghsinyi jíjiùshǒushùxíngwèizǔquèwéifǎshìyóuzhījìnghé AT huángxīnyí jíjiùshǒushùxíngwèizǔquèwéifǎshìyóuzhījìnghé |
_version_ |
1718057778195464192 |