손해배상(의)
1. All appeals filed by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) on the principal lawsuit and counterclaim are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be the principal lawsuit.
1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance citing this case is as follows, and the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance citing this case is identical to that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the dismissal of some of the grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance as follows.
[Attachment] Of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, the first instance court’s last 7th parallel “this Court” was “court of the first instance court,” and the first instance court’s 9th 5th 19th parallel 19th parallel : The medical personnel at Defendant Hospital cut off the deceased’s new dynamic connection and salkes after double check in the process of the first operation of the first instance court, and cut off the deceased’s new absorbing salkes to non-absorbing salkes, etc., and the blood salkes, etc. around the part of the second operation, were connected to the deceased. Since the first operation, a large quantity of blood salkes were generated to the deceased after the first operation, and during the second operation, blood salkes and blood was observed in large quantities of parts of the deceased due to the damage to the blood salkes of the first operation department and mass salkes.
D. However, in light of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence and the purport of the entire pleadings, the medical personnel of the Defendant Hospital damaged the deceased’s blood transfusion during the first surgery. The facts that there was a bad result of the first surgery, as seen earlier, and other circumstances asserted by the Plaintiffs.
It is difficult to confirm that there was negligence in failure to properly conduct blood ties or negligence in the course of the first operation by the medical personnel of the defendant hospital, and there is no other evidence to deem that there was medical negligence in the course of the first operation. Therefore, this part of the plaintiffs' assertion is without merit.
㈎ 망인은 우측 신장 중하부에 걸쳐 있는 종양으로 인해 우측 신장이 내측으로 밀려 있어 내측에 위치한 주요 혈관과의 간격이 좁아져 있어 신동맥과 신정맥을 결찰할 수 있는 공간이 부족하였다.
2.2