1. Validity of an agreement under which he/she does not hold the person responsible for a sudden situation that may arise in the course of hospitalization of the psychopath;

2. Where a mentally ill person who always has been required to open himself/herself has cut his/her satisfaction by a mistake from the operators of the dysium, the father of the claim for nursing expenses;

1. Even if a contract was concluded to not impose liability on a person who is in a sudden situation (including death) during which the patient was hospitalized in a veterinary hospital, it cannot be deemed that the agreement is an agreement to exempt the above operator from liability to compensate for damages caused by negligence of the said operator.

2. Even if the care and custody of a psychopath who is in charge of the treatment and care of a mentally ill person has frequently observed and checked the heating condition, health condition, etc. of the patient hospital due to negligence, which caused the injury to the patient, and caused him/her to take care of him/her, and thus, he/she need to take care of him/her, the above care and care expenses should be borne if the mentally ill person continued to have been hospitalized before the brain mental hospital, etc. is transferred after the outbreak of the mental fission, and it is possible for him/her to communicate with his/her family, and even if he/she did not have any symptoms, the above care and custody expenses should be borne by him/her at all times in preparation for suicide or any accident.

Article 750 of the Civil Act

Plaintiff 1 and six others

Defendant 1 and one other

Busan District Court (80 Ghana2539)

From January 8, 1979 to full payment, the part against the Defendants ordering payment of KRW 4,820,220 to Plaintiff 1 and the part against which the Defendants ordered payment from January 8, 1979 to full payment at a rate exceeding five percent per annum, shall be revoked, and the same part of the Plaintiff’s claim corresponding to that part shall be dismissed.

The appeal by Plaintiff 1 and the remaining appeal by the Defendants against Plaintiff 1 and the appeal by Plaintiff 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 are dismissed, respectively.

Of the costs of lawsuit, the part arising between Plaintiff 1 and the Defendants is divided into four parts in both the first and second instances, and three parts are assessed against the Defendants, the remainder, the same Plaintiff, and the remainder of the Defendants, respectively.

The Defendants jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff 1 the annual interest rate of KRW 33,563,09 and the annual interest rate of KRW 500,000 from January 8, 1979 to the date of full payment, to Plaintiff 2, and 3 the annual interest rate of KRW 1,00,000, KRW 50,000, and the annual interest rate of KRW 50,000 for each of the said amounts to Plaintiff 4, 5, 6, and 7 from January 8, 1980 to February 28, 1981, and the annual interest rate of KRW 25,000 from the following day to the date of full payment.

Costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the defendants, and a judgment of provisional execution shall be pronounced.

(1) The purport of Plaintiff 1’s appeal

The part against the above plaintiff in the original judgment shall be revoked and same as the purport of the claim.

(2) Purport of the defendants' appeal

The part against the defendants in the original judgment shall be revoked.

All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

All the costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiffs in the first and second instances.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

According to Gap evidence Nos. 2, 4, and 5 without dispute over the formation of the document, Gap evidence Nos. 10, 12 presumed to have been established in the entire document, the witness of the court below's remaining, Park Jong-nam, Lee Won-won's testimony for the examination of the witness of the court below, the plaintiff Nos. 4 and 2 of the court below's own examination results, the plaintiff Nos. 1 and 3 of the court below's criminal records verification results (except for the part not trusted in the front) and the whole purport of the oral argument, the plaintiff Nos. 1 and 3 of the court below's mental fission evidence before the second grade of the Busan High School, and there is no possibility that the plaintiff Nos. 1 and 12 of the court below's admission of the plaintiff Nos. 1 and 4 of the court below's new evidence Nos. 97 of the court below's new admission of the plaintiff Nos. 1 and 3 of the above defendant Nos. 9 of the court below's new evidence No.

According to the above facts of recognition, Plaintiff 1 suffered injury as above, it is caused by negligence that the Defendants, who are in charge of his medical treatment and care, did not frequently observe and check the heating condition of the hospital and the above Plaintiff’s health condition. Thus, the Defendants, as joint tortfeasor, are liable to compensate for the damages suffered by the Plaintiffs.

However, the Defendants’ legal representative agreed with the Defendants to bear all the responsibilities of the Plaintiffs due to the Plaintiff’s negligence during the hospitalization. As such, the Defendants are not liable for the damages of this case. Accordingly, according to the Plaintiff’s statement No. 1, Plaintiff 2, the father of Plaintiff 1, who was the Plaintiff 1, was hospitalized in the Suyangyang on December 6, 1978, and the Plaintiff 2, the father of Plaintiff 1, who was the Plaintiff 1, did not have any dispute over the establishment, agreed not to hold the Defendants liable for the unexpected situation (including the death) during the hospitalization of the said Plaintiff. However, the agreement cannot be deemed as an agreement to exempt the Defendants from the compensation for damages caused by the Defendants’ negligence, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge the aforementioned assertion.

2. Calculation of damages;

(a) Medical expenses, etc.

In full view of the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 5-1 through 19, Gap evidence Nos. 6-1 through 7, and Gap evidence Nos. 7 and all purport of the arguments in the oral argument as a result of the physical appraisal by the 10th day of the original trial, the plaintiff 1 was hospitalized in the hospital affiliated with the Busan University from January 8, 1979 to November 1, 1979, and was given medical treatment at the hospital affiliated with the university of Busan University. The total amount of the hospitalization and treatment costs is KRW 1,058,720, and the sum of the medical treatment costs separately purchased for the treatment of the injury according to the direction of the doctor during that period is KRW 61,50, and the above plaintiff 1 was cut to the upper part of the 20th day of the 20th day of the 20th day of the 20th day of the 195th day of the 10th day of the 10th day of the 10th day of the 20th day of the 3th day of the 20th day.

(B) Consolation money

Since not only the injured person of the plaintiff 1's above injury but also the remaining plaintiffs in his status as above are clearly suffering from considerable mental pain according to our rule, the defendants are liable for the above monetary payment. As to the amount, considering the circumstances, results, the plaintiffs' age, and personal relation, all circumstances shown in the arguments, such as the plaintiff 1's argument, it shall be reasonable to determine the amount of 2,00,000,000 won to the plaintiff 2,000,000 won to the plaintiff 2, and 3, and 5,000,000 won to the plaintiff 4,5,6, and 7, respectively.

(C) passive damages and nursing costs.

The plaintiff 1's legal representative asserted that the above plaintiff 1's mental disease had no particular trouble in the general social life. Thus, if he did not have such an injury, the plaintiff at least 23 years old who completed military service can obtain monthly wages from the age of 55. The plaintiff lost 67 percent of ordinary labor capacity and suffered losses from the plaintiff 1's daily life without any opening of the above accident. Further, the plaintiff's legal representative's mental disease had no possibility to incur losses to the plaintiff 1's mental health care for 46 years old average after the date of the above accident. Thus, the plaintiff's assertion that there was no possibility that the above defendant should compensate for the above damages because it was hard to find that there was no possibility that the plaintiff's mental disease had no mental health care for 23 years old as well as the above mental health care witness's mental health care for the time of the above accident. Thus, the plaintiff's testimony and the purport of the first instance court's testimony cannot be acknowledged in light of the above premise that the above plaintiff's mental health care witness's mental health care for 2 years old.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to plaintiffs 1 the above medical expenses and consolation money of KRW 4,820,220, and to plaintiffs 2 and 3 the sum of consolation money of KRW 1,000,000, KRW 4,5,6, and 7 as consolation money, each of which is 500,000,000, and as to plaintiffs 1 as consolation money from January 8, 1979, the date of accident, to each of them, and as to the remaining plaintiffs 1, the rate of 5% per annum of the Civil Code from January 8, 1980 to the date of full payment (this case falls under Article 3 (2) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, etc.). Thus, since the plaintiffs' claims are justified within the scope of the above recognition, the remaining part of the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed, and the remaining part of the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as to the plaintiff 9's appeal is without merit.

Judges Lee Jong-sung (Presiding Judge)