손해배상(의)
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against Plaintiff A, equivalent to the following amount ordered to be paid, shall be revoked.
1. Basic facts
A. During the process of Plaintiff A’s moving tin, etc. at the top of June 17, 2015 by inserting them into loading and moving a car, Plaintiff A was shocked on the front side of the car, and due to its shock, the safety was separated from the upper upper part of the said tin, and the Plaintiff’s safety was caused by an accident, which led to the shock of Plaintiff A’s left side of the car (hereinafter “instant accident”).
B. On June 17, 2015, Plaintiff A applied to “D Council members” operated by the Defendant on the instant accident, and received sporadic sporadic sporadic sporadic sporadic spodic spodic spodic spodic spodic spodic spodic spodic spodic spodic spodic s
C. Since then, Plaintiff A’s second and third parts of the left-hand side 2 and 3 meta of Plaintiff A had a sonies. Plaintiff A applied to F Hospital on July 7, 2015 to cut the second parts of the second parts of the upper left-hand side and received the third parts of the third parts of the third parts of the upper left-hand side on July 9, 2015, respectively, and was cut off by the top-hand side 2 and 3 parts of the upper left-hand side (hereinafter “instant parts”).
Plaintiff
B is the child of the plaintiff A.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's 1 to 3, 9 evidence, Eul's 3 to 5 evidence (including branch numbers), the result of the first instance court's entrustment of physical appraisal to the E hospital head, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The parties' assertion
A. Although the Defendant, who violated the Plaintiffs 1’s medical care duty, was obligated to maintain the operation room and operation equipment in a feasible state to prevent infection on the part of the surgery while collecting the surgery, he neglected such duty. Despite the absence of the ability to perform the surgery or medical equipment, he performed the surgery in an unreasonable manner, and neglected the obligation to take appropriate measures by observing the progress after the surgery.
In addition, the plaintiff A excessively controls the outside of the hospital and transfers it to another hospital.