Seoul court upholds recovery of COVID home-care fees over missed patient checks
In short
The Seoul Administrative Court upheld the recovery of patient-management fees from a clinic that failed to perform twice-daily COVID-19 home-care checks. The disputed payments totalled 9,075,340 won, according to Asia Economy.
Read the full story 1 min read
The Seoul Administrative Court rejected a clinic operator's challenge to a National Health Insurance Service order recovering fees for COVID-19 home care after the clinic failed to meet a twice-daily monitoring requirement. Reports published on October 18 said the court upheld recovery of the improperly paid fees in full. Asia Economy put the amount at 9,075,340 won. Seoul Economic Daily reported that the ruling was issued in August. [ 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 ]
The clinic, in Seoul's Nowon district, was designated to manage COVID-19 patients receiving treatment at home between February and April 2022, according to Asia Economy and Seoul Economic Daily. The rules required two daily checks of patients' condition. Asia Economy reported that these included body temperature and oxygen saturation, with remote consultations or emergency measures if abnormal symptoms appeared. The operator argued that the twice-daily requirement applied only during the ongoing treatment stage, rather than on the first and last days, and that full recovery was excessive given the difficult circumstances of the pandemic. [ 1 , 3 , 4 ]
The court held that monitoring was a basic duty throughout home treatment, including its first and last days. Separate provisions for starting and ending care added duties rather than removed the underlying requirement, according to Asia Economy. Exceptions could be possible when twice-daily checks were impracticable, but the court found the operator's evidence insufficient to establish such circumstances. It also distinguished recovering improperly paid fees from punishment: the purpose was to return money that should not have been paid. The judges found that full recovery did not breach proportionality or amount to an unlawful exercise or abuse of discretion. [ 1 , 3 , 4 ]
Why it matters
The court said the monitoring requirement also applied on the first and last days of home treatment. It found that recovering the improperly paid amount in full was lawful.
Key facts
- The Seoul Administrative Court rejected a clinic operator's challenge to a National Health Insurance Service recovery order. [ 1 , 3 , 4 ]
- The clinic did not meet the requirement for twice-daily patient monitoring. [ 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 ]
- The court held that the requirement covered the first and last days of home treatment. [ 1 , 4 ]
- Asia Economy put the amount subject to recovery at 9,075,340 won. [ 1 ]