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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

A. On July 22, 2017, the Plaintiff, a doctor of the Defendant’s (hereinafter “instant surgery”), received an amount-saving surgery at C’s clinic operated by the Defendant (hereinafter “instant surgery”).

B. On July 23, 2017, the Plaintiff was released on August 8, 2017 from the hospital’s emergency room due to symptoms, such as booms, hearts, and Gutotoo, and was admitted to the hospital’s emergency room.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Defendant violated the duty to explain all important matters, such as risks that may arise from the surgery prior to the instant underwater surgery, and thus, the Defendant sought payment of consolation money to the Plaintiff on November 23, 2017 by the E organization’s adjustment decision. According to the above decision’s content, the above KRW 2 million falls under consolation money due to the Defendant’s breach of the duty to explain. Accordingly, the claim of this case also claims of this case are judged to seek consolation money due to the Defendant’s tort.

A person shall be liable to pay 2 million won.

3. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. Relevant statutes and legal principles 1) When a doctor performs an operation, etc. which is likely to cause serious harm to a human life or body, he/she shall explain to the patient the patient the symptoms that occur or may occur to the patient, the necessity, method and details of the operation, the name of the doctor participating in the operation, etc., and the matters to be observed by the patient before and after the surgery, etc., which are anticipated to occur typically according to the surgery, etc., and shall generally obtain consent from the patient in writing (Article 24-2(1) and (2) of the Medical Service Act).