beta
Text
The plaintiff's appeal and the claims extended by this court are dismissed, respectively.
2. Each of the costs of lawsuit after the appeal is filed.
Reasons
1. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is three times a week in the C Hospital operated by the Defendant, and when a specific nurse inserted the sony, he did not feel pain, while in most cases, he did not feel pain, and even in most cases, he did with pain and pain.
Therefore, although the plaintiff complained of severe pain and stress, and requested that the plaintiff be able to undergo a surgery from a specific nurse with a good ability to perform the surgery, and to improve the ability of nurses, the defendant did not comply with this.
As a result, the plaintiff suffered a considerable mental suffering, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff a solatium of KRW 20,000,000 and the delay damages.
2. Determination
A. In order to hold the medical personnel liable for tort due to the medical personnel's breach of the duty of care in medical practice, the occurrence of damages, and the causal relationship between them should be proved. Therefore, if the medical personnel who bears the duty of care to take the best measures required to prevent risks depending on the patient's specific symptoms or circumstances due to the nature of the medical practice fails to fulfill the patient's medical care in breach of the patient's expectation, it shall be deemed that the medical personnel has breached the duty of care, but if there is no proximate causal relationship between such breach of the duty of care and the malicious result (as a result), it shall not be claimed for damages.
However, in a case where the degree of violation of the duty of care is deemed to have been remarkably unfaithful as much as the level of tolerance in light of the position of the general public, it can constitute a tort in itself and thereby order compensation for the mental suffering suffered by the patient or his/her family. However, in this case, the degree of violation of the duty of care is so unfaithful that it goes beyond the limit of tolerance.