logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2013.05.14 2012가합9626
손해배상(의)
Text

1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 222,64,777; (b) KRW 7,00,000; and (c) KRW 5,00,000; and (c) KRW 5,00,000, respectively, to Plaintiff A and D.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The parties concerned Plaintiff A is a person who was admitted to the Fentsian (hereinafter “Defendant Council member”) operated by the Defendant and was damaged by the Defendant and received treatment from the Defendant. Plaintiff B is the spouse of Plaintiff A, and Plaintiff C and D are the children of Plaintiff A.

B. On September 2010, Plaintiff A was diagnosed as having shown that both fingers and fingers end and fingers were low, and that the right bridge at the time of walking shows a little degree of view, and thus, Defendant A was given medical treatment on October 16, 2010 when the symptoms were found, but the symptoms were not revealed. 2) The Defendant heard the symptoms of Plaintiff A, and diagnosed that the Plaintiff’s symptoms were revealed, and that there was an abnormal disorder in the chromatic body, and there was a low symptoms.

C. On October 16, 2010, Plaintiff A conducted the instant procedure and passed the instant procedure. On October 16, 2010, Plaintiff A obtained water from the Defendant during a multiple period of time from the Defendant for a crypted and conical cryplateing to the bed and conical cryplateing to the bed.

After spits, the spits, spits correction and the bones surrounding spits, and the bones correction and spiting spits (at the floor to cover spits and pressure over several times the bones spits from spits to spits), and spits and spits with spits using spits, spits, spits, and spits, using spits, and spits, using spits and spits, to adjust the locations of spits by spits, and 10 minutes of spits by spits, and each part of the above spits, together with the above spits (hereinafter referred to as “instant procedures”).

(2) On October 19, 2010, Plaintiff A had been undergoes the instant treatment again on 19, 2010. On the same day, Plaintiff A appeared to have shown less than the first one. However, before the instant treatment, Plaintiff A was undergoes the instant treatment on her left hand than her bad hand, and her left hand after the instant treatment.

arrow