On November 2, 2011, when the Defendant was on duty at the above hospital around 06:30 on November 2, 201, the Defendant received a report from the nurse H that the blood pressure of the victim was lowered to 90/60, that the bee 90 times per minute, and the respiratory amount exceeded 50 times per minute, and that the victim complained of two copies.

In such cases, the physician on duty has a duty of care to take appropriate measures as a medical practitioner depending on the patient’s condition, such as checking the patient’s condition directly and taking necessary measures at the site, and taking all measures when it is impossible to take such measures at the relevant hospital. In particular, the victim was a patient who was under emergency treatment after being transmitted for excessive medication, and thus, the Defendant had a duty of care to check the patient’s condition more carefully.

Nevertheless, the Defendant merely instructed the above nurse H to observe the state of the victim continuously, and caused the victim to die of the victim due to the cardiopulmonary light at the above hospital around 11:15 on the same day due to the negligence of failing to perform the above obligation to take measures.

2. Determination

A. In order to recognize a medical employee’s negligence in a medical accident involving a medical employee’s negligence, the medical employee’s occurrence of the outcome could have been predicted and avoided, but it could not be predicted or avoided. In determining the existence of such negligence, the standard for the degree of ordinary person’s care engaged in the same work and duties should be the standard. Accordingly, the general level of medical science at the time of the accident, the medical environment and conditions, and the characteristics of the medical practice should be determined.