채무부존재확인
1. With respect to accidents beyond the E-Medical Center located in the wife population D on April 9, 2019 by the network C.
A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is a person who operates a welfare facility for the aged that is called E-Medical Care Center (hereinafter “instant medical care center”) in the population of the wife population D in Young-si.
The deceased C (hereinafter referred to as the "the deceased") shall be a person who had been admitted to the Medical Care Center from February 6, 2019 to the Medical Care Center, and the defendant shall be a child of the deceased and his/her legal heir.
B. On April 9, 2019, around 15:15:15, the Deceased discovered that the toilets of the instant medical center were exceeded (hereinafter “instant accident”) and the caregiver and transferred the Deceased to G Hospital.
C. On April 9, 2019, the Deceased was hospitalized by the G Hospital after receiving the diagnosis of the left-hand cata, and was conducted on April 15, 2019, but died on April 16, 2019 on the following day.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The parties' assertion
A. The Plaintiff’s instant accident occurred beyond his body due to weakening the deceased’s influence, and it is irrelevant to the Plaintiff’s breach of duty of care. Therefore, the Plaintiff is not liable for damages.
Even if the responsibility of the Plaintiff is recognized, the liability should be limited in consideration of the background of the accident, the occurrence of the accident, and the health conditions of the deceased that have affected the expansion of damage.
B. In the case of senior citizens admitted to the Medical Care Center including the Defendant Deceased, it is widely known that the Plaintiff is frequently aware of the medical care center employees, and the Plaintiff left the Deceased alone without performing his/her duty of probation, even though he/she could have sufficiently predicted such occurrence, and where the Deceased does not appear to be injured, he/she did not immediately become aware after the occurrence of the instant accident, and neglected the Deceased for a considerable period of time, even though he/she did not have a duty to verify his/her location and safety.
In addition, it is concluded between the deceased and the plaintiff and the defendant.