篇名

在日本刺青是否屬於醫療行為之爭【寰宇醫事裁判】   免費試閱

並列篇名

Debate on Whether Tattoo Is a Medical Practice in Japan

中文摘要

由於厚生勞動省將刺青術視為醫療行為,本件被告即因施行刺青術而遭警方以違反醫師法第17條開罰。大阪地方法院認為,刺青乃損害皮膚表層、破壞真皮微血管網,而有出血、感染等衛生保健上危害,因此刺青為醫療行為而須由醫師施行;縱然對刺青業者有營業上限制,但要求其取得醫師執照已是最小手段,故無違憲。大阪高等法院卻駁斥這樣的見解,認為刺青術雖有使人體健康危害的風險,但依一般社會通念,其不具有醫學相關性故而非醫療行為;要求刺青業者取得醫師執照,也超過必要限度而侵害職業選擇自由。因此,高等法院判決被告無罪。

英文摘要

Since Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare regards tattoo as a medical practice, the accused was fined by the police for violating paragraph 17 of Physician Act. Oosaka District Court held that tattoo is a hazard to the health care such as bleeding and infection because it would damage the surface of the skin and destroy the microvascular network of the dermis, and therefore it should be a medical practice practiced by a physician. Although it could be restrictions on the business of tattoo artists, the requirement to obtain a physician license is the minimum mean, so it is not unconstitutional. Oosaka Hight Court rejected this perspective, holding that tattoo could be a risk to human health, but it is not a medical practice, because it is not medically relevant according to common sense, and that it could exceed the necessary limits and infringes on freedom on occupational choice to require the tattoo artists to obtain the physician license. Oosaka Hight Court found the accused not guilty as the consequence.

起訖頁

128-132

出版單位
DOI

10.53106/241553062022070069009  複製DOI  DOI查詢

QRCode

數位整合服務
產品服務
讀者服務專線:+886-2-23756688   傳真:+886-2-23318496   地址:臺北市館前路28號7樓

Copyright © 元照出版 All rights reserved. 版權所有,禁止轉貼節錄
TOP