beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
Reasons
1. From August 10, 2010 to March 19, 2011, the Plaintiff asserted that Dental Hospital’s dentists, who were dentists of Dental Hospital in Daegu-gu, had been undergoing a crypt operation on the left-hand 2 cryp and 1, and 2 Daegu-gu cryp. However, the Plaintiff cryp procedure was conducted on the left-hand cryp and cryp of the infants undergoing the cryp procedure. As the Plaintiff cryped on the part of the infants undergoing the cryp procedure, the Plaintiff complained of inappropriate cryp and pains on the part of the infants undergoing the cryp procedure.
Nevertheless, the Defendants did not provide appropriate treatment and agreed with each other, and made the Plaintiff short of the Plaintiff’s fluoral by arbitrarily fluoring the Plaintiff’s fluoral, which led to the difference between the Plaintiff’s fluoral and the Plaintiff’s fluoral fluoral, and the Plaintiff suffered serious physical and mental pain due to the fluoral fluoral and pain of the fluoral fluor who received the fluoral procedure.
As above, the Plaintiff suffered damages due to the Defendants’ erroneous treatment, and thus, 27,500,000 won as stated in the purport of the claim (i.e., KRW 12,500,000 for future medical treatment costs of KRW 15,000 for consolation money) and damages for delay from March 19, 201 for which an appropriate method was performed.
2. In full view of the records of Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 3, the results of the physical appraisal of appraiser E of the first instance trial, the results of the request for the supplementation by appraiser F of the first instance trial, and the overall purport of the pleadings, the defendants' procedure of disturbance against the second or second or the second or the second or the right side of the plaintiff was successful, the plaintiff's procedure of disturbance against the second or the second or the second or the right side of the plaintiff was conducted, in order to resolve the non-conformity problem asserted by the plaintiff, proper treatment was conducted, such as implementation of re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-fition on the left side, and the plaintiff's result of physical appraisal by appraiser F of the first instance trial is recognized.