beta
Text
1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 1,00,00 for Plaintiff A; (b) KRW 4,204,124 for Plaintiff B; and (c) for each said money, from September 12, 2012 to May 2015.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The plaintiffs are those who were treated as a pair of parts and cryp treatment from the defendant as a schip and cryp treatment, and the defendant is sexual intercourse with a doctor.
B. On August 31, 2012, and September 12, 2012, the Defendant: (a) carried out the instant treatment to Plaintiff B on the part of Plaintiff A, respectively; (b) removed each of the instant practice on September 6, 2012 for Plaintiff B and on September 18, 2012 for Plaintiff A.
C. However, as a result of the crypting procedure to the plaintiffs, there was a chest on each side of the inside sides, and in the case of the plaintiff B, both sides were unbrupted, and the part of the plaintiff B left chest.
(hereinafter referred to as “the side effects of this case”). [Grounds for recognition] A dispute is not established. The result of physical appraisal conducted on April 30, 2014 to the director of the Ansan Hospital annexed to the Korea National University, the purport of the entire pleadings as a whole.
2. The parties' assertion
A. Plaintiffs 1) The Defendant selected an erroneous method in front of the instant treatment to the Plaintiffs. In the case of Plaintiff B, while performing the instant treatment, the Plaintiff did not remove the local organization properly, resulting in the side effects of a pairing spawned. In addition, the Defendant did not explain the side effects of the instant treatment to the Plaintiffs throughout and after the instant treatment. Accordingly, the Defendant, as damages for nonperformance or tort, is liable to compensate the Plaintiff for damages amounting to KRW 47,782,930 ( KRW 22,782,930, KRW 25,000, KRW 25,000,000, KRW 535,885,104, KRW 5,100, KRW 250,000 ( KRW 25,000, KRW 25,000) and damages for delay.
B. The defendant's assertion that there was no medical negligence, such as conducting the instant procedure by appropriate means, and sufficiently explained to the plaintiffs about the method and side effects of the instant procedure. The defendant's assertion is a well-known fact that the instant procedure may occur after the instant treatment, even without any exception.