beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.03.10 2016가단5016972

손해배상(자)

Text

1. The Defendant: 5% per annum from June 22, 2015 to March 10, 2017, respectively, to the Plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. Fact 1) C is deemed D Launasi (hereinafter “Defendant”) around June 22, 2015 around 23:33, 2015.

) A driver of Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, driving along the four-lane road in front of Dongdaemun-gu along one-lane distance from the longest radius from the longest border line, while driving along one-lane, in the straight line of a vehicle for which U.S. is not allowed, the front part of G Haba, which was driven by F, driving along the longest distance from the longest border line to the longest border line in accordance with the Manish subparagraph, along the straight-line signal of a vehicle for which U.S. is not allowed, was driven by the front part of the Defendant vehicle (hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”).

(2) Due to the instant accident, F suffered injury, such as flapel and pelkes, and died on June 23, 2015, after undergoing surgery, on June 25, 2015.

(hereinafter referred to as “F”) 3 Deceased was in the state of cost of inter-regional pressure, high blood pressure, urine, urine, and heart equipment prior to the operation.

The examination of medical records reveals as follows.

“The possibility of being the cause of death of the deceased is presumed to be the kind of pulmonary body due to the decline in the heart function. Although the deceased is unlikely to be acutely fluored, it is difficult to readily conclude it. If the heart color is the cause of death, it is disease to increase the frequency of occurrence of the deceased’s rain, high blood pressure, and urology. If the deceased did not undergo the operation, it would not have any rapid decline in the heart function, and on the contrary, there is a high possibility that the heart function would not have been reduced after the operation, and on the contrary, the National Scientific Investigation Institute would have not caused the death of the deceased.” However, it is difficult for the deceased to consider the body injury of the deceased’s bridge itself as a fatal damage in light of the fact that the death and the death of the deceased was caused after the operation after the operation.”