本文目的在於觀察司法實務上，醫療機構是否可能成爲訴訟當事人，並針對「醫療法」 與「醫療法施行細則」所明定醫療機構4大面向與32點細項之法定義務進行刑事與民事裁判 之出現頻率分析。本研究發現僅民事訴訟中，醫療機構方有成爲訴訟當事人之可能，且以醫 療機構法定義務中「制度設計面」之告知同意制度、病歷建立保管提供制度、轉診制度、適 當急救制度與値班制度出現於刑事與民事裁判中頻率最高。未來「醫療糾紛處理及醫療事故 補償法（草案）」通過後，赋予醫療機構建立機構内風險事件管控機制之義務，除醫療機構在 「内部組織架構面」、「制度設計面」、「決策形成面」與「設備設施建置面」4大面向上持續 強化因應外，本文呼籲一旦發生醫療糾紛，醫療機構應在態度上積極介入，在立場上保持客 觀中立，在行爲上落實通報，並善用調解機制，以降低因系統性錯誤導致醫療糾紛進而被起 訴之風險。

The aim of this article is to observe judicial practices and study whether medical institutions could become plaintiff or defendant. Besides, 4 aspects and 32 points of medical institutions’ legal obligations regulated in the “Medical Care Act” and the “Enforcement Rules of the Medical Care Act” are analyzed its frequency shown in criminal and civil cases. This article concludes that medical institutions could be plaintiff or defendant only in civil cases. In addition, among medical institutions’ legal obligations, the system design aspect, which includes informed consent system, medical reports’ establishment, keeping, and providing system, referral system, appropriate first aid system, and on duty system are the most frequent ones shown in criminal and civil cases. After the “Medical Malpractice Resolution and Compensation Act (draft)” passes in the future, medical institutions are endowed to establish the obligation of internal risk control mechanism. Medical institutions shall continually prepare the four aspects called the internal organizational structure aspect, the system design aspect, the decision making aspect, and the equipment and facilities building aspect. The article appeals that if medical malpractices happen, medical institutions should actively involve in attitude, objectively maintain neutral in position, and fulfill notification in action. Mediation is suggested to be properly used to decrease medical malpractices caused by systematic errors and risks to be sued.