beta
Text
1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.
Purport of claim and appeal
1.
Reasons
The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows, except for the following: (a) whether the part of the judgment of the court of first instance at the end of the 8th or 9th or 8th or 9th or 10th or 10th or 10th or 10th or 10th or less of the deceased’s cerebrovassissis disease is not doubtfully suspected; and (b) the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is
(1) In light of the following circumstances, it is reasonable to view that Defendant E, as a doctor, has taken necessary measures to promptly conduct an examination or request another hospital to undergo an appropriate treatment, on the ground that there is any negligence on the part of the deceased who did not take proper measures to suspect cerebral cerebral ties of the deceased, and the overall purport of the arguments in light of the following circumstances revealed in light of the aforementioned facts: (a) during the period from November 4, 2015 to the 22th day of the same month before the occurrence of the instant accident; (b) during the period from the beginning of the instant accident to November 4, 2015 to the date of the occurrence of the instant accident; and (c) during the period from suspicion that the symptoms, such as the remaining two pains of the deceased, ridges, pains, and low forests, etc., might have been caused by cerebral ties; (d) however, it is reasonable to deem that the deceased committed a medical negligence
On November 4, 2015, the Deceased, who was in the middle of the two pages, planned the MRI inspection and brain wave inspection to be conducted at the M Hospital on November 4, 2015, and on the same day, the Deceased was hospitalized in the Defendant Hospital and cancelled it. Defendant E, a doctor, was also aware of the fact.
(A) As such, Defendant E needs to carefully observe the two copies of the Deceased during the period of hospitalization of the Deceased.
However, the Deceased was hospitalized in the Defendant Hospital and before the occurrence of the instant accident, which is serious to Defendant E or the nurse in charge.