logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전고등법원 2017.04.28 2015나13308
손해배상(의)
Text

1. The plaintiffs' appeals against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Plaintiff B and C are married couple, and Plaintiff A and D are their children. Plaintiff B, as mother mother, is the Na Hospital located in Seo-gu Daejeon, Daejeon, on March 22, 2011 (hereinafter “Defendant Hospital”).

(2) At the time when Plaintiff B gives birth to Plaintiff A, the Defendants are women and doctors who jointly operated the Defendant Hospital at the time when Plaintiff B gives birth to Plaintiff A.

(B) After that, Defendant I only runs the joint operation of the Defendant Hospital and leaves his job to another hospital).

Plaintiff

A’s delivery 1) On January 6, 2008, Plaintiff B was a woman in childbed who gave birth to Plaintiff D through the king operation, and was pregnant with the Plaintiff, and was under the OBAC’s diagnosis at the Defendant hospital (VBAC). From February 15, 2011 (VBAC), the Defendant hospital was under the crypt examination at the Defendant hospital. No particular opinion was confirmed in the process of the crypt examination. (2) On March 21, 2011, Plaintiff B was hospitalized at the Defendant hospital on March 21, 201 (the 39th fourth day in pregnancy), around 08:00 on the same day, and Plaintiff B was hospitalized at the Defendant hospital on the same date on 23:00,000 on the same day, and Plaintiff B was unable to take care of only 10:20,000 on the same day, and Plaintiff B’s 1:60,000 on the same date.

C. 1) After delivery, Plaintiff A did not have a sound, did not have a lux, and there was no luxation by lux, and there was no luxation by a newborn baby. Accordingly, the medical personnel at Defendant Hospital immediately taken measures, such as removing the head of the Plaintiff’s body by miling the Plaintiff’s body at a prisoner of war, inducing the Plaintiff to sound by stimulating the luxing floor. On the other hand, Plaintiff A performed cardiopulmonary resuscitation by using an amping ample-baging (Ambu-baging) to supply a oxygen by means of an ample-outing (Ambu-baging) and led the Plaintiff to self-harm. 2) The luxbbbing number of Plaintiff A was 1 minute later than 00,000.

arrow