손해배상(의)
1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.
Purport of claim and appeal
1.
The reasons why the court should explain this case are the same as the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance, except for adding the following judgments as to the matters alleged in the court of first instance, thereby citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
Whether there was negligence in breach of the duty to possess emergency medical equipment for additional matters, the plaintiffs asserted that the defendant was negligent in failing to keep them entirely despite having to be equipped with the so-called "emergency cart" in the form of a multi-level eromatic shock in which emergency medical equipment and medicines are kept in the CT inspection room so that he/she can promptly cope with the risk that he/she may suffer from an Abiotype shock from early administration D.
In light of the above, the defendant is also the person who did not have an emergency cart in the defendant hospital CT Inspection Office at the time of the occurrence of the side effect of this case to D. However, in full view of the overall purport of the arguments in each video of No. 1-5 of the evidence No. 1-2, the defendant hospital can recognize that the operation and treatment room of the CT Inspection Office and the emergency medical center are located within a distance of 10 meters from the toilet to the toilet. In light of the above, in the case of the situation requiring first aid in the CT Inspection Office, it seems that prompt response is possible by the medical personnel using an emergency cart within the emergency medical center or who is stationed at the emergency medical center. As recognized in the reasoning of the first instance judgment, it is difficult to readily conclude that the defendant violated the duty of emergency medical treatment equipment by the reason that the case did not have an emergency medical treatment equipment in the defendant hospital CT Inspection Office.