beta
(영문) 대법원 2018.05.15 2016도13089

업무상과실치사

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the claim of breach of duty of care in relation to medication, the lower court determined that the Defendant’s negligence on the use of the above drugs was not recognized on the ground that the Defendant’s appearance of booms used in the process of inducing the victim to anesthesia, and the volume of the drugs such as booms did not exceed the permissible scope, and the mixture methods of the above drugs do not differ from the actual law in clinical process.

In light of the records, the judgment of the court below is just, and the judgment below did not err by misapprehending the legal principles as to occupational negligence, or by misapprehending the legal principles as to occupational negligence, as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

2. In determining whether a medical doctor was negligent in a medical accident regarding an allegation of breach of duty of care in relation to emergency treatment, the standard for the degree of general attention of ordinary persons engaged in the same duty and occupation shall be based on the standard, and the general level of medical science, the medical environment and conditions as at the time of the accident, characteristics of medical practice, etc. shall be considered (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do8165, Dec. 10, 2015). The lower court determined that the Defendant used for the victim restricted the victim’s respiratory movement.

It is difficult to see that the victim was negligent in observing the victim, and that the victim was found to have immediately discovered the fact of the suspension of the heart.

The court determined that it could not be seen.

In addition, the court below found that there is an inappropriate aspect for emergency treatment, such as oxygen supply, artificial respiratory and cardiopulmonary resuscitation conducted by the defendant immediately after the victim's abnormal signs have occurred.

The defendant, who transferred the victim to an emergency department of a nearby hospital while implementing the above emergency treatment, was not equipped with emergency treatment equipment and drugs, such as clibling, clibling, clibing, and clibling, in order to secure the level at the time, and was not equipped with the emergency treatment equipment and drugs by itself.

It is difficult to view it.

The decision was determined.

At the time of the instant accident.