206Na77953 Compensation (Definition)

1. 00

2. 00

3. 00

4. 00

Plaintiff 3 and 4 are minors.

Person with parental authority over a legal representative 000, mother 000

The address of the plaintiffs, Yangju-dong 00

Plaintiffs (Law Firm 00)

Attorney Lee In-bok

100

Attorney Lee Do-young

Suwon District Court Decision 2005Gahap3929 Decided July 12, 2006

February 8, 2007

March 15, 2007

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the amount ordered to pay is revoked, and each of the plaintiffs' claims corresponding to that part is dismissed.

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 00 the amount of 40,457,478 won, the amount of 38,882,478 won, the plaintiff 00, the amount of 500 won per annum from July 25, 2004 to March 15, 2007, and the amount of 20% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment.

2. All remaining appeals by the Defendant are dismissed.

3. The total costs of the lawsuit are divided into two parts, one of which is the plaintiffs, and the other is the defendant's own burden.

1. Purport of claim

Defendant: 105, 721, 815 won to Plaintiff 00, Plaintiff 100 to Plaintiff 105, Plaintiff 721, 815 won, Plaintiff 000, and Defendant 00

From July 25, 2004 to the date on which a duplicate of the complaint of this case has been served, each of 5,000,000 won and its corresponding amounts

No. 5% per annum, from the following day to the date of full payment, to pay 20% interest per annum.

2. Purport of appeal

The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the defendant shall be revoked, and all of the plaintiffs' claims against this shall be dismissed.

the court below's judgment.

1. Basic facts

The following facts are not disputed between the parties, or can be acknowledged by taking into account the following facts: Gap evidence 1-1-2, Gap evidence 2-2, and Eul evidence 6-8; the results of the request for the examination of medical records to the chief of the Korean Medical Association of the first instance court; and the purport of the whole arguments as to the results of the inquiry of the fact to the chief of the Korean Government-Intern Hospital of the

(a) The relationship between the parties;

Plaintiff 00, 000 and 000 are the parents of Nonparty 00 (son, son, 5 August 1995) who died from cerebral hepatitis on July 25, 2004, and Plaintiff 00 and 000 are the parents of the above 000, and the Defendant is the intention to operate the Defendant at 00,000 won (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant Member”).

B. On June 29, 2004, Plaintiff 00 complained of the symptoms such as the above 00 heat, the two 00 heat, the two ambs, and the two ambs. On the same day, around 14:00 on the same day, Plaintiff 1 complained of the symptoms such as the above 000 ambs and the two ambs, and applied to Defendant Assembly members. As a result of the examination, the Defendant diagnosed the symptoms of the above 000 as being acute ambsy, infectious infection, and disguisedly prescribed that the above 00 was infected control (not ambsat), bovinebys (typhan), and fire extinguishing and disguised medication.

(2) Although the above 00 used a medication prescribed in accordance with the directions of the Defendant’s order to return home, the head of the unit and the Gu were continued until her invasion on June 30, 2004 on the following day, and the Plaintiff 00 and the above 000 applied again to the Defendant Council member at around 09:00 on the same day. (3) Although the Defendant diagnosed and opened the above 000, the Defendant diagnosed that there was only such pain, and provided a reduction of the solution to the prescription for acute hepatitis (i.e., g., the Simorine), and (ii) to improve the head of the household movement (i.e., the amount of deposit for the Red Sea Pream) and (ii) to use the 600 uniforms, notwithstanding the above new prescription, the above 00 uniforms were newly prescribed.

30. From Supper to July 1 of the same year, the Guide Madon had been newly continued at night, and around 7.1.09:30, and again passed to the Defendant Council member. The Defendant still prescribed a similar medicine by diagnosing the 000th symptoms as a acute and acute hepatitis, and then returned to the Republic of Korea.

C. On July 17, 200, 200, Plaintiff 00, after the above 000 was returned to Defendant Council members, consulted that the above 00 was in an emergency situation from neighboring persons, and was inside the two central hospital emergency room in the two states, together with the above 00:0 on July 17, 2004. At the time, the above 00 had already been in an anti-marction, and the above 00 had had had a serious symptoms on the part of the body, such as clothes and clothes. The doctor Kim Jong-type of the two states hospital was in an emergency situation from Plaintiff 00 to the third government mother hospital in the Geumdong-dong, the above 00 was in an emergency situation from the 00th day of the above 00th day of the 200th day of the 20th day of the above 20th day of the 20th day of the 20th day of the 201st day of the above 1st day of the 20th day of the marc.

(3) On July 2, 200, after the above 000 medical personnel in an emergency room, the medical personnel in the above medical personnel in the medical personnel in the medical personnel in the medical personnel in the medical personnel in the medical personnel in the medical personnel in the medical personnel in the medical personnel in the medical personnel in the medical personnel in the medical personnel in the medical personnel in the medical personnel in the medical personnel in the medical personnel in the medical institution, and administered the usa, which is an anti-biotic product in the strophin and the high-level anti-biotic product in the strophaccos. The awareness in the above 000 continued to have been affected by the mea while taking measures to reduce the metension. However, on the same day, the above 00 medical personnel in the medical personnel in the medical personnel in the medical personnel in the medical personnel in the medical care in the medical institution in the medical personnel in the medical personnel in the medical service, had been under joint signature of the cardiopulmonary resuscitation, and had been under the meathic resuscitation on the same day: 0202.

A death.

2. The parties' assertion

The plaintiffs first, the defendant divided the cause of the outbreak into virus and spawn, and if spawn, it is possible that the cause of the outbreak might be developed into brain infection. Thus, the defendant judged that the viral viral viral viral gral gral gral gral gral gral gral gral gral gral gral gral gral gral gral gral gral gral gral gral gral gral gral gral gral gral gral gral gral gral gral gral gral gral gral gral gral gral gral gral gral gral gral gral gr.

As to this, the Defendant cannot be deemed to have erred in failing to fulfill the duty of care required for the Defendant in the diagnosis, even if the Defendant judged the above 00th viral hepatitis as a viral hepatitis, because the symptoms or symptoms overlap between the fral hepatitis and the viral hepatitis, and it is difficult to distinguish them. Moreover, it is reasonable to view the above 000 death symptoms as having been generated in the first place, and that it was difficult for the Defendant to have developed the fralosis by the fralosis because it was not possible for the Defendant to undergo a medical examination, and there was no other symptoms to suspect the fralosis infection. Therefore, even if the Defendant determined the viral hepatitis as a viral hepatitis, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant did not exercise the duty of care required for the Defendant to avoid the viral infection, and thus, it cannot be deemed that the Plaintiff’s claim for the fralosis was unfair on the premise that the Plaintiff’s fralosis had not been predicted by the Plaintiff’s fral infection.

3. Judgment by issue

A. A. A physician of a duty of care for medical treatment (1) is obligated to take the best measures required to prevent danger depending on patient’s specific symptoms or circumstances in light of the nature of the duties of managing human life, body, and health. Such duty of care shall be determined on the basis of the level of medical practice performed in the clinical field, such as a medical institution, at the time of performing medical practice. In particular, diagnosis is an important medical practice selected by the Medical Treatment Act by identifying whether a patient is suffering from disease based on the outcome of diagnosis, diagnosis, promotion, hearing, and various clinical tests, and specifying the kind, character, degree, etc. of the disease and its degree of progress. Thus, in determining whether there is negligence in the diagnosis, even though it is impossible to conduct a complete clinical diagnosis, it shall be determined on the basis of at least the level of diagnosis performed in the clinical medical field, within the scope of the level of diagnosis performed, and if it is determined on the basis of prudent examination and diagnosis factors of the patient at the time of performing such medical practice, the doctor shall be determined on the basis of the relevant medical institution’s specific results (2).

The following facts can be acknowledged by comprehensively taking into account the following facts: Gap evidence 2, Gap evidence 3-1, 2, and 6-8; the results of the examination of medical records by the President of the Korean Medical Association of the first instance court; the results of the examination by the President of the Korean Medical Association of the Korean Medical Association of the first instance court; and the overall purport of arguments as to the results of the examination by the President of the Korean Medical Association of the Korean Medical Association of the first instance. On July 1, 2004, the defendant diagnosed the above 00 with the diagnosis of the brain infection by implementing the examination by the first instance court witness, and the witness testimony by the first instance court witness of the first instance court, even if the defendant conducted the examination above, should be recorded in the medical record area, the result of the examination by the defendant's medical record area, and it is difficult to believe that the plaintiff's 00's occine infection continued without any explanation about the possibility and symptoms of the occine infection.

(B) In addition, on July 1, 2004, when the above 000 was given medical treatment by the Defendant’s Council member and received approximately three-hour acparine medication, the Defendant did not explain to the above 000 or the Plaintiff 00 about the possibility of spaculous brain infection and its symptoms and risks. After returning home 00, the above 00 was asked the above Plaintiff about whether spaculum infection was made by telephone from the above Plaintiff, but the above Plaintiff responded to the above 000 age group without any special treatment.

(C) As a result of the inspection of the above 00 water level at the above Masung Hospital, it was confirmed that he had been infected with A military bepymosis (one-person Abepymosis research infection) ; (d) relevant medical knowledge 1) acute hepatitis is a acute chronymitis, including one-ferry or two-way hepatitis; and (e) the cause of the inspection is a virus or three-way chronymitis, and the cause is a virus.

B) The symptoms are different depending on the research germs or viruses, or in the case of the majority of them, and clinically different symptoms are similar to symptoms. In the case of virus infection, the outbreak period begins with the pains, sporasiumssis, food booming, and the strings of the company at the beginning of the normal period, does not continue within five days after the large day, and where a merger certificate or severe spokeic symptoms continue to run up to the decrising state.

each other. . . . . . . ..

C) In the case of research fratitis, two or more years of age begins with symptoms, such as common frat, clothes, frat, and frat, and fratitis. In the case of acute fratitis, it is deemed that the fratitis in A military forces excluding the frat fratitis is at least 15%, and it is difficult to think of the fratitis most strongly when there are symptoms of acute fratitis and acute fratitis without symptoms of the above fratitis. In the case of fratitis, fratitis may occur, and the fratitis can be developed with the fratitis. 2) The fratitis of the fratitis is highly high, fratine, fratine, and fratine fratitis, and the fratitis of the fratitis can be found to have a high fratitis and fratitis.

B) The spaculous brain infection refers to the spacule reaction that appears when the brain spacule in the spacule and prop-aculine is infected by spacule. In most cases, it may lead to spacule in most cases, i.e., e., e., spaculosis; ii) intrusion into Non-Insulduneary cells; iii) intrusion into Non-Insuldune cellsary cells; iv) the existence of spaculosis and blood spacule; v) passing through the blood spacule organ; vi) infiltration into brain spaculum; vi) the progress rate may lead to a congested state within 2 and 3 days.

C) In the event that there is a suspected brain infection of the patient, the examination must be conducted through the Kenyan test to verify the symptoms of both parts of the two parts in detail, and whether the symptoms appear. As can be seen, if there is any pain that the inspector rapidly gets into the patient’s head at the time when the patient gets out of the patient’s head, the Kenyanif there is any pain that the latter gets out of the patient’s head. This is shown in most brain dynassis and hynassis, excluding part of the viral brain dynassis infection.

D) The accurate diagnosis of thypitis requires at least 72 hours until the result of the thypology test is confirmed, and it is necessary to promptly administer a wide range of antibiotics during the preparation for the examination, thereby preventing the rapid aggravation of thypine.

(3) Determination

According to the above legal principles and facts, since it is difficult for the deceased to distinguish the initial symptoms of the hypitis or the hypitis similar to the hypitis, it cannot be deemed that the defendant was negligent in medical treatment immediately on the ground that the defendant did not examine or transfer the hypitis to a university hospital, etc. on the day of the above 000 internal organs, without considering the possibility of brain hypitis. However, in the case of this case where the deceased continued to hypine a new hypology after the night on June 30, 204 on the day following the day when the above 00th internal organs were first prescribed, the defendant is a doctor of this case, by taking into account the possibility of development of the hypitis infection caused by hypitis infection, i.e., the defendant, by making efforts to separate it, and by making efforts to explain to the plaintiff's guardian of the above 00-day hypump infection to the patient.

However, without considering all the possibility of the brain infection as a spawn infection and its spawn infection, the defendant promptly diagnosed the disease of the above 000 with virus infection and disguised infection and did not take any measures for the spawn infection. The defendant's answer that the above 000 guardian, who is the guardian of the above 0000 guardian, suspected of the spawn infection, did not know about the above spawn infection, and delayed the treatment of the spawn infection. Ultimately, the defendant's error led to the above 000 satise that it was difficult to recover at the time when the spawnitis was transferred to the spawnian Hospital, and eventually led to the death. Thus, the defendant is liable to compensate for damages suffered by the above 00 millions and the plaintiffs due to medical negligence.

B. Limitation on liability

Where damage occurs or has been expanded by competition between harmful acts and the factors of the injured party, even if the factors of the injured party are irrelevant to the causes of the injured party, such as the risk of physical talented cattle or disease, in light of the form and degree of the disease, etc., if it goes against the principle of comparative negligence, the court may apply the principle of comparative negligence to determine the amount of compensation and apply it to the injured party who contributed to the occurrence or expansion of the damage (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Da16713, Jun. 24, 2005).

In light of the above legal principles and the facts acknowledged as seen earlier, it is difficult to conduct accurate diagnosis at the early stage of the outbreak because brain infection is similar to the satise, and in the case of brain satise infection caused by satise infection such as this case, even if the defendant takes appropriate measures such as prompt progress within 2,3 days, so it is difficult to view that the diagnosis can be delayed and the result of death can be completely prevented. At the time of the accident, the above 000 still remains at about 9 years old and has considerable immunity systems and capabilities, and it is difficult to expect that the above 000 would rapidly worsen from the time of treatment by the defendant, and thus, if the above satise satise satise satise satise satise satise satise satise satise satise satise satise satise satise satise satise satch.

C. Scope of liability for damages

In addition to the following separate statements, the aforementioned 00 medical accident of this case and the basis of calculation, expenses, calculation, and the amount of the property and mental damage suffered by the plaintiffs are as shown in the corresponding item of the attached table of calculation of damages (Provided, That it shall be calculated at the present price at the time of the accident of this case in accordance with the simple discount method that deducts interim interest by the ratio of 5/12 per month, and it shall be discarded at the time of the accident of this case in the convenience of calculation). (1) The facts of recognizing the lost income (Ga) of 00 above 00 and the contents of the appraisal.

(1) Personal information: The same shall apply to the descriptions in the column for calculation of damages in attached Form.

(2) Residential right: 00 :

(3) Monetary assessment of operating ability: It is determined that the income equivalent to the urban daily wage might have been raised from 22 years of age to 60 years of age, which is presumed to have been presumed to have been attained by the above 000 adult and have been completed military service.

(4) Cost of living: 1/3 of the deceased's income)

[Grounds for Recognition: (1) Calculation of Facts, empirical rule, evidence No. 4-1, 2, evidence No. 5-1, 2, and evidence No. 5-2, the purport of the whole pleadings, and the purport of the whole pleadings] (2) Calculation: (2) Calculation of the total amount of the daily income in the attached Form No. 1 for Calculation of Damages (original) Funeral Expenses. (2) Funeral Expenses

3,500,000 won paid by Plaintiff 00

[Reasons for Recognition: The limitation of liability: The same is as stated in the column of comparative negligence set forth in the annexed Table of Calculation of Compensation Amount. (4) The reasons for the consolation money (A): the above 000 and the plaintiffs' age, family relations, circumstances of accidents, and results, all the circumstances shown in the oral argument (B).

net 000 : gold 8,000,000

Plaintiff 00, 000: 3,000,000 each amount

Plaintiff 00, 000: Each 500,000 won (5) inheritance relationship: The same shall apply to the attached amount calculation table of damages and the inheritance share column.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the defendant shall compensate the plaintiff 00 for damages amounting to 40,457,478 won (property damage amounting to 1,575,00 won + 35,882,478 won + 3,000 consolation money + 3,882,478 won to the plaintiff 00; 38,882,478 won (Shares of inheritance + 35,882,478 won + 3,000,000 won; 50,000,000 won; and 3,000,000,000 won; and the defendant's claim for cancellation and damages from July 25, 2004, which are the date of the accident, shall be dismissed for the reasons for dismissal of each of the above part of the plaintiffs' claims within the limit of 20% per annum of the above judgment; and it shall be dismissed for 30% per annum of the defendant's remaining grounds for rejection and damages.

The presiding judge shall admonish a judge;

Judges Dokpool Park

A judge is unable to sign and seal due to transfer;

The presiding judge