beta
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2016.12.07 2015가단111549

손해배상(의)

Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 44,625,308 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of 5% from July 10, 2012 to December 7, 2016, and the following.

Reasons

1. Establishment of liability for damages;

A. On July 10, 2012, at the “C Hospital” operated by the Defendant, the Plaintiff was performing two salvine removal operations on the right side side side side side side side and the rear side side side (hereinafter “instant operation”).

D Recognizing that the species of the right side after the opening of the skin for surgery did not seriously affect the surrounding organization and attachment, but that the species of the rear side are serious due to the severe dystye of salt, and that in such circumstances, when removing the species, it was recognized that the gys of the rear side is inevitable to damage the surrounding organization.

Nevertheless, D removed all the conditions of the neute of the neute and the neute of the neute in addition to the species of the right side.

In the physical examination of the plaintiff performed after the surgery of this case, the dynasium was observed on the right upper part of the plaintiff through the dynasology test (Gynasium E) of the appraiser (Gynasium E).

변론종결일 현재 원고는 우측 상지의 근력 저하, 저린 느낌, 어깨 통증, 후경부(後頸部) 통증 등을 호소하고 있다.

The above symptoms were incurred after the instant surgery.

[Witness D’s testimony to the effect that the above symptoms existed before the surgery, but it is called "MRI" as a self-known video (MRI: MRI) necessary to verify whether the instant surgery was a surgery for the cosmetic purpose, and whether it was accompanied by a sagtic Reson’s iance with another testimony (main newspaper 6-1) of the witness when the instant surgery was performed for the cosmetic purpose.

(D) Circumstances in which the inspection was omitted (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 201Do1448, May 2

In light of the facts, there is no credibility of this part of the witness's testimony among the witness's testimony [this part of the testimony is without credibility]. [No ground for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 1-12, witness D's testimony, part of the witness D's testimony, the result of the physical examination entrusted to the director of the hospital affiliated with the college of the Republic of Korea University at the

B. Whether liability is recognized or not, 1.