1. The plaintiff and defendant B's appeal are dismissed, respectively.

2. Of the appeal costs, the part relating to the Plaintiff’s appeal is the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. A. Around August 2017, Defendant B was used for cerebrovascular and was hospitalized in a hospital, and the Plaintiff started the nursing care for Defendant B from August 28, 2017 at the request of D in a de facto marital relationship with Defendant B.

B. Around March 2018, Defendant B managed insurance proceeds, such as expenses for hospitalization of disease, medical expenses for disease, long-term hospitalization, etc., which Defendant B received according to an insurance contract concluded with Defendant B, and delivered a passbook where the said insurance proceeds are deposited to Defendant C, his/her father’s wife, and from that time, Defendant C managed the said insurance proceeds of Defendant B.

C. On March 27, 2018, Defendant C applied for the commencement of adult guardianship for Defendant B. On June 12, 2018, the Busan Family Court rendered a decision to commence adult guardianship for Defendant B as the Head of Busan Family Court Decision 2018 D. Defendant C was appointed as adult guardian.

The Plaintiff sent Defendant B to July 1, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the obligation to pay nursing expenses is constituted;

A. As to Defendant B, who is a party to a contract constitutes a matter of interpretation of the intent of the party involved in the contract, and the same applies when determining who is the party to a medical contract, if a person who is not a patient requests a medical practitioner to treat a patient with an unknown consciousness or personal capacity, the medical practitioner’s relationship with the patient, the circumstance leading up to the request for medical treatment, whether the requester intended to bear expenses incurred in the medical treatment of the patient, the patient’s consciousness and condition, and the patient’s treatment process, etc. should be comprehensively examined, and the determination of whether the medical contract for medical treatment was concluded between the medical practitioner and the medical practitioner should be made (see Supreme Court Decision 2012Da118396, Aug. 27, 2015). While the Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant B is a party to the nursing contract, the Defendant is a party to the said nursing contract, and accordingly, a party to the said nursing contract