beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.11.01 2018나63754

손해배상(기)

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On September 10, 2016, the Plaintiff: (a) applied the 3rd left-hand balance of revenues and the hiversary phenomenon to the “C Jongwon” operated by the Defendant; and (b) the Defendant explained to the Plaintiff the cause of the disease and the method of exercise for treatment.

B. On November 25, 2016 and June 20, 2017, the Plaintiff returned to the Plaintiff on the ground of the same symptoms, and the Defendant provided injection treatment to the Plaintiff and prescribed resistant medicine, etc.

C. On December 6, 2017, the Plaintiff re-entered the Plaintiff on the ground of the symptoms, the Defendant introduced the cryptive procedure (hereinafter “instant procedure”) to the Plaintiff, explained the method and progress of the procedure, etc., and subsequently, recommended the Plaintiff to undergo the cryptive procedure while explaining the cryptive procedure requiring the cryptive treatment, as the Plaintiff’s symptoms do not appear.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1 and 2 evidence, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. Although the method of treating the plaintiff's alleged disease exists in addition to the procedure of this case, the defendant explains to the plaintiff only the cause of disease, the exercise method for treatment, and the method of the procedure of this case, etc., and did not mention that the procedure was not mentioned.

As a result, the Plaintiff was infringed on the right of self-determination to hear all explanations about the instant procedure and the cardio-cerebral procedure and to choose for any procedure.

Ultimately, the defendant is obligated to pay consolation money to the plaintiff who suffered from mental distress, since he did not fulfill his duty to explain in performing the instant procedure.

B. Determination as to whether a doctor is obliged to pay consolation money, etc. for a doctor’s violation of the duty of explanation against a patient is performed by a physician without properly explaining the patient.