logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.02.05 2014가단80592
손해배상
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is operating a postnatal care center in the name of “C” in Seongbuk-si, Sungnam-si (hereinafter “instant postnatal care center”). The Plaintiff, after giving birth on February 6, 2014, performed postnatal care in the instant postnatal care center from February 10, 2014 to March 3, 2014.

B. On March 11, 2014, the Plaintiff received the diagnosis of “Masan Pungso” from the medical hospital of the branch of the East National University, and the Plaintiff incurred a total of KRW 1,452,52,520 from March 11, 2014 to April 11, 2014.

In addition, from March 3, 2014 to March 28, 2014, the Plaintiff spent KRW 2,080,000 by using the mountain-dominium.

C. On March 3, 2014, the Defendant signed a performance note stating that “The Plaintiff’s side was unable to fully perform the contract related to the postnatal care that was concluded with the instant postnatal care center due to the structural defect, such as the breakdown of the boiler of the said postnatal care center, and caused mental and physical harm to the Plaintiff and his family by negligence on the part of the said postnatal care center, and did not raise any objection against the Defendant’s compensation, and all burden of proof on the part of the said postnatal care center will not raise any objection to the said postnatal care center” (hereinafter “instant performance note”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 (including additional numbers), Eul's statement Nos. 1 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion (i) during the period of postnatal care in the instant postnatal care center, the Plaintiff was unable to take appropriate measures even though he/she filed an appeal against the boiler failure on February 25, 2014, February 27, 2014, and March 1, 2014.

In addition, on March 2, 2014, the Plaintiff resisted the Defendant to the boiler breakdown on the discharge date, and the Defendant is broken down in the boiler system of the postnatal care center.

arrow