logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2020.11.27 2020가단526387
손해배상(기)
Text

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 13,409,00 and KRW 12,389,00 among them, from June 25, 2020 to November 27, 2020.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. From September 2017 to April 2018, the Plaintiff entered into a contract (hereinafter “instant contract”) with the Defendant under which he/she is to undergo the flachie hedging (hereinafter “instant contract”), and paid KRW 1,020,000 in total to the Defendant for the said period.

B. From 2018, the Plaintiff received the above procedure and showed symptoms, such as shesheshesheshe was difficult to face and shesheshesheshe became aware of, and the red and she did not go against.

Therefore, even though the Plaintiff stated these symptoms against the Defendant, the Defendant continued to conduct a Hague color procedure against the Plaintiff by April 2018 without undergoing an inspection, etc. to confirm whether the Plaintiff’s Hague products used by the Defendant bring about algorier reaction.

C. As above, the Plaintiff continued to deepening the above symptoms while taking a Hague chroe procedure. As such, the Plaintiff was provided medical treatment upon request from CP on April 2018.

On April 3, 2020, the doctor of the above hospital issued a diagnosis to the plaintiff on April 3, 2020 that the plaintiff's face and chromosome (hereinafter "the injury in this case") occurred on the part of the plaintiff's face and chromosome (hereinafter "the injury in this case") so far, and it seems that continuous treatment in the future is necessary, but it is judged that the permanent chromosome is likely to occur, notwithstanding the constant treatment.

On the other hand, the defendant, as heading Sungwon District Court Branch 2019 Highly 6912, "from around 2017 A to April 2018, the plaintiff's face is changed to the plaintiff's face while playing hedging or salting in the plaintiff's mother's hair, and there were symptoms, such as shelshes, difficult, and sheshesheshesheshels. Therefore, the defendant's total 25 times continues to be negligent in examining the occurrence of side effects after suspending hedging or salting as a person engaged in chroding, even though he/she has a duty of care to perform his/her duties.

arrow