Cases recognizing the right to terminate the contract for the guarantee of hospital treatment expenses

The case affirming the judgment below that where Gap's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son

Article 543 of the Civil Act

A school juristic person private teaching institute

Defendant 1 and one other Defendants, Defendant 1 and 1 others, Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Busan District Court Decision 94Na6830 delivered on January 12, 1995

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

We examine the Plaintiff’s ground of appeal.

The court below acknowledged the fact that the defendants jointly and severally guaranteed the payment of the medical treatment expenses by the non-party 1 who was hospitalized in the Busan White Hospital in the plaintiff's management by suffering the injury to the above non-party 1 due to the plaintiff's negligence in the operation of Obaba, and therefore, the non-party 2 was responsible for compensating the above non-party 1's medical expenses. However, during the investigation process, the above non-party 2 was not negligent in Obaba in operation, and therefore, the above hospital knew that the above non-party 2 was not responsible for compensating the above non-party 1's medical expenses, and therefore, the above hospital's demand for the payment of the medical expenses was sent to the above hospital on December 16, 192 without the liability for paying the medical expenses. The defendants can unilaterally terminate the contract of guarantee of the medical treatment expenses, and the above defendants' notice contains no liability for termination of the contract of guarantee after arrival of the contract of guarantee after arrival of the above defendant's notice. The court below's reasoning and its reasoning are without merit.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Cho Chang-tae (Presiding Justice)