logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.11.07 2018가단5197462
손해배상(기)
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 Plaintiff obtained a medical license in March 2010, and served as a person with general surgery at a hospital operated by the Defendant from March 201 to February 2015. Of which, from March 2014 to August 2014, the Plaintiff served as a four-year-lane worker with general surgery.

B. On May 16, 2018, the Plaintiff received a proposal from D Hospital located in Bupyeong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, that “The Plaintiff will provide a fixed cash and meal expenses, etc., if the Plaintiff prescribed H, which is a medicine manufactured and sold in the State F, from the business G of the (State) pharmaceutical company,” and received a cash of KRW 3,50,000 in the same way four times from the date of receipt to June 2014, and received KRW 3,90,000 in the aggregate of KRW 1,40,000 in the same way, and received KRW 1,40,000 in 12 times from the medical personnel, for the purpose of promoting the sale of medicines. Accordingly, the Defendant (the Plaintiff) received an investigation from the investigation agency that received an economic benefit of KRW 5,390,00,000 including the said money of KRW 1,40,000 in the aggregate from the pharmaceutical medicine supplier.

C. On July 17, 2018, the public prosecutor in charge of the Seoul Western District Public Prosecutor's Office denied the crime by asserting that "the plaintiff (the plaintiff) was not in contact with the pharmaceutical company's business members, and the former I was in charge of these duties." Since I and J's statements correspond to them and there is no other sufficient evidence to prove the fact of the crime, they were subject to disposition on the ground that I and J's statements correspond to them and there is no other evidence to prove the fact of the crime."

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 2 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is an ordinary task at the D Hospital affiliated with the Defendant from March 2014 to August 2014.

arrow