AI虛擬醫師冒用醫師名義之法律規制—以醫師法第7條之2為中心【本期企劃】 試閱
The Legal Regulation of AI Virtual Physicians Impersonating Physicians: Focusing on Article 7-2 of the Physicians Act
隨著生成式AI與深度偽造技術日益普及，利用虛擬人物外觀、聲音及對話能力傳播醫療資訊之現象，已逐漸成為醫療法制上的新興問題。2025年底爆發之「AI虛擬醫師陳志明」事件，即顯示行為人得透過虛構醫師形象散布不實衛教資訊，進而影響民眾的健康判斷、用藥選擇及對正規醫療體系的信賴。本文以醫師法第7條之2為中心，探討利用AI虛擬醫師冒用醫師名義行為，是否得作為現行法下的裁處對象。本文認為，若個案已涉及詐欺取財、導流牟利或實施醫療業務，現行法下仍有適用空間，並不當然存在處罰漏洞，但針對虛擬醫師外觀與名義對外傳播醫療資訊時，在醫師法第7條之2的「使用醫師名稱」及「責任主體認定」上均可能面臨解釋困難。基此，本文主張，除應審慎檢討現行條文的適用界限外，並應從事前平台揭露、標示與下架機制，以及修法與提高裁罰金額等兩個面向，建立完整的應對機制。
With the rapid development of generative AI and deepfake technologies, the dissemination of medical information through virtual personas with human-like appearances, voices, and conversational abilities has emerged as a new issue in medical law. The “AI Virtual Doctor Chen Chih-Ming” incident at the end of 2025 illustrates how fictitious physician personas may be used to spread false health information, thereby affecting the public’s medical judgment, medication choices, and trust in the healthcare system. Focusing on Article 7-2 of the Physicians Act, this article examines whether the use of an AI-generated virtual doctor to appropriate a physician’s identity may be subject to regulation under current law. It argues that existing law may still apply where the conduct involves fraud, profit-making diversion, or the actual provision of medical practice. However, interpretive difficulties remain regarding the meaning of “using a physician’s title” and the identification of the responsible legal subject. This article therefore suggests both ex ante platform-based measures, including disclosure, labeling, and takedown mechanisms, and ex post legal reform, including statutory amendment and increased administrative penalties.
018-031
