Telemedicine system is still insufficient.

  Telemedicine is the exchange of medical information from one place to another using electronic communication technology to provide advanced medical services to patients. Nowadays, technological development and interest in telehealth due to COVID-19 have increased. This system can help rural telehealth and reduce healthcare costs. However, I oppose the introduction of the telehealth system.

  First, misdiagnosis can occur when using telehealth and the cost of healthcare can increase. Unstable auscultation will be carried out only with medical information measured by patients, not professional medical workers. Because it is rare for a patient to have a professional medical measuring device, the measurement can be inaccurate. When a doctor does telehealth, the patient's condition should be checked and prescribed using this auscultation. Also, patients and physicians should communicate solely by relying on information and communication technology. If communication between the patient and the doctor is not done properly, misdiagnosis can occur and the patient's safety cannot be guaranteed. It is not in line with telehealth's intention to lower healthcare costs because the risk of this misdiagnosis and misprescription can increase healthcare costs.

  Secondly, the safety of patients cannot be guaranteed due to personal information security issues such as hacking and identification of medical personnel and patients in the process of using information and communication technology and the Internet, which are essential elements of telehealth. There is no government-proven case of technological safety of telehealth, and the 2014 Remote Medical Technical Safety Assessment conducted by the association as an external research project shows that the technological safety of telemedicine is highly vulnerable to hacking.

  Finally, doctors are liable for misdiagnoses or medical accidents caused by telehealth. Currently, Article 34 of the Medical Act stipulates that 'the person who does remote medical care shall have the same responsibility as the case of treating patients face-to-face'. In other words, a telehealth doctor is liable for misdiagnoses or medical accidents, malfunctions due to faulty information and communication technology and misdiagnoses or medical accidents. There are practical difficulties for doctors who are busy diagnosing and treating patients to acquire and manage information and communication technology, and it is not reasonable for doctors to bear the legal responsibility for misdiagnoses and medical accidents that may occur due to lack of medical safety. In other words, the government has allowed limited non-face-to-face medical care in the Korona-19 situation, but there is still a problem that doctors should be fully responsible when medical responsibility arises.

  Of course, there are many advantages to telehealth systems, but there are many problems such as the risk of misdiagnosis, information security problems, and doctor responsibility. Although there are increasing opportunities for technology to develop and convenient life, there are still many problems to solve to introduce telehealth systems. An empirical analysis of the medical safety and effectiveness of telehealth should be made through telehealth demonstration projects for a sufficient period prior to the introduction of telehealth In other words, prior to the introduction of telehealth limited preconditions for telehealth (regions, targets, delivery methods, types of provision, conditions, etc.) need to be clearly defined. It would not be too late to discuss telehealth deregulation thereafter.