beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 안양지원 2021.03.26 2017가합103134

손해배상(의)

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On March 3, 2015, at around 11:00, the Plaintiff received c2 rashing procedures (hereinafter “instant procedures”) from the Defendant to remove approximately 26 points from the Defendant, both inside and outside of the inside and outside of the inner part of the body, the left and right side, and the rear side of the body.

B. The Plaintiff’s face after the instant procedure is conducted shall be observed by red reflect and pleassing.

[Grounds for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence No. 1, Gap evidence No. 2, Gap evidence No. 2, and the purport of the whole theory

2. Plaintiff’s assertion and judgment thereon

A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion resulted in bad results that the Plaintiff’s occurrence of red reflects and scarbs on the Plaintiff’s face due to the following medical negligence. The Defendant did not explain to the Plaintiff prior to the instant procedure the principle, method, and side effects that may occur after the instant procedure. Therefore, the Defendant is liable to compensate the Plaintiff for property mental damage caused to the Plaintiff due to the Plaintiff’s medical negligence or breach of the duty to explain.

1) In the process of the instant procedure, the Defendant carried out the instant procedure in an excessive manner.

2) The Plaintiff, prior to the instant procedure, was merely engaged in the Plaintiff’s experience in the removal procedure, and did not perform a gate on important matters, such as skin disease, the existence of the skin, etc.

3) After the instant procedure, the Defendant explained the outline of the management of the parts of the procedure, and neglected to observe the possible side effects of the procedure by soliciting a regular visit thereafter.

B. Determination as to the occurrence of liability for damages caused by medical negligence 1) The following facts and circumstances are acknowledged based on Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 2, Eul evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 5, Eul evidence No. 5, evidence No. 5, evidence No. 5, evidence No. 1, and evidence No. 1, evidence No. 1, and evidence No. 1, evidence No. 1, and evidence No. 1, evidence No. 1, 2020, and evidence No. 1, evidence No. 1