beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.09.22 2016가단5064254

치료비 등

Text

1. The Plaintiff, Defendant B, Defendant C, Defendant C, and each of them shall be repaid from February 23, 2016.

Reasons

1. (1) In full view of the respective descriptions and arguments of Gap evidence 1-1-3 and 3-1-3, the plaintiff is an oriental medical doctor operating one of the three floors of D Building 13-1 in Jung-gu, Seoul, and defendant B is an oriental medical doctor operating one of the three floors of D Building 13-1 in the same year from January 25, 2013.

7. Until December 13, 199, the above oriental medicine doctor prescribed 9,95,90 Korean medicine, including 3 times of the hysium therapy, 23 times of the hysium therapy, 7 times of the hysium therapy, 30 days of the hysium therapy, 30 days of the hysium therapy, 100 of the hysium therapy, and the medical expenses and medicine expenses incurred in the treatment from January 30, 2013 to January 30, 2013.

7. Until August 18, 200, the above oriental medical treatment expenses and medicine expenses were prescribed to be 10,294,300 won in the above oriental medical treatment expenses and 80,000 won in the above oriental medical treatment expenses and 14,00 won in the above oriental medical treatment expenses, and 8,00,000 won in the above treatment expenses and 10,000 won in the above treatment expenses and 14,000 won in the above treatment expenses and 7,003,00 won in the medical treatment expenses and 100,000 won in the medical treatment expenses and 30,000 won in the plaintiff.

(2) According to the above facts of recognition, Defendant B is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff KRW 9,494,300 (=10,294,300 - 800,000) and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from February 23, 2016 to the date of full payment, which is obvious as the day following the delivery of the original copy of the instant payment order.

(3) As to this, the Defendants asserted that they cannot respond to the Plaintiff’s claim because they were under treatment while taking advantage of the Plaintiff’s medical examination and taking advantage of the side effect while entering another hospital. However, they did not prove any proof. Thus, the above assertion is rejected as it is without merit.

2. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the ground that the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified.