本文先從理論面探討消費者保護法第七條對醫療行為適用的問題，將其區分為瑕疵醫療行為與告知義務之違反兩大類，分別說明其問題的所在，也比較了美國與德國對相關問題的處理方式。也由現行實務判決加以檢討，說明消費者保護法之適用在審判實務上的問題，依據個案的情形，加以分析整理。其次也討論民法第一九一條之三對於醫療行為適用的可能性，並就學說加以檢討。最後從醫療的社會面切入，分析醫病間緊繃關係的由來與期待。

　　　　　This paper first discusses in theory the application of Article 7 of the Consumer Protection Act on medical disputes, and approaches the issue from the standpoints of malpractice and failure to obtain consent, elaborating on their respective difficulties. Comparison is made with American and German practices. The issue is then analyzed through individual case judgements involving application of Article 7. Article 191-3 of the Civil Code, which closely resembles Article 2050 of the Italian Civil Code and the res ispa loquitor doctrine originating from the U.S., is also explored as a possible tool in medical dispute litigation, and its potential discussed under various schools of thought. The conclusion focuses on the tension between medical doctors and their patients.