logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원성남지원 2019.11.29 2016가단230194
손해배상(의)
Text

1. The claim of this case is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On June 5, 2015, the Plaintiff: (a) complained of the Defendant’s “B regular surgery” to the right knee’s pain; (b) was hospitalized at the instant hospital after receiving an operation from the Defendant on the right knee part (hereinafter “the first operation”); and (c) was conducted again by the Defendant on the same 20th day of the same month on the same 13th day of the same month (hereinafter “the second operation and the third operation”).

B. On June 25, 2015, the Plaintiff transferred to C Hospital and was hospitalized in the said hospital after receiving scare-free washing and erode-acting (activating), and was hospitalized in the said hospital on the right kne-free side of the hospital. On July 6, 2015, the Plaintiff performed the same surgery on the same side on the same side, and discharged the Plaintiff on July 30, 2015, and thereafter received three outpatients from the said hospital.

C. On September 1, 2015, the Plaintiff was hospitalized in D Hospital on September 3, 2015, and discharged on September 21, 2015, the Plaintiff was under the fluoral-fluoral-fluoral-fluoral-fluoral-fluoral-fluoral-fluoral-fluoral-fluoral-fluoral-fluoral-fluoral-fluoral-fluoral-fluoral-fluoral-fluoral-fluoral-fluoral-fluoral-fluoral-fluoral-fluoring-f

The Plaintiff was permanently deprived of 16.8% labor ability on the right kne kne by the operation of the said human mission.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 8 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 5, the results of the physical appraisal commission to E hospital funerals, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion: (a) the Defendant, while neglecting the disinfection of the operation tool, etc., caused the Plaintiff to be infected by melting the primary operation by negligence; (b) on June 13, 2015, the Plaintiff was found to have been infected by melting culp; and (c) on June 16, 2015, by negligence failing to take appropriate measures, such as inserting culp inserted in culp, and thereby, caused the Plaintiff to permanently lose 16.8% labor ability by getting the Plaintiff to undergo culpization.

arrow