1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant is a person who operates a hospital in the following cities: (a) and is engaged in medical services, such as internal medicine and clinical trials; (b) the Defendant is a medical specialist in charge.

On November 12, 2013, the defendant around 10:00, in order to verify whether the victim E (in female, 73 years of age) has any available species within the victim's register, the defendant put the scop into the victim's port after anesthesia the surface of the water and carried out the scop and the scop in the register.

The victim is old, the thickness of the register is less than ordinary people, and there is no power to increase well, and the defendant has previously been aware of the above facts because the defendant has been conducting inspections on the interior of the register on two occasions.

In particular, S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and entered S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-A-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-

Ultimately, the Defendant suffered damages to the victim’s unclaimed ladying and laging the number of days of treatment due to the above occupational negligence.

2. Determination

A. There is negligence on a physician in a medical accident

In order to determine the existence of negligence, it is recognized that the doctor could have predicted and avoided the occurrence of the result, but did not have predicted or avoided it, and it is general to engage in the same work and occupational category when determining the existence of negligence.