logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
의료사고
red_flag_2
(영문) 서울고등법원 2011. 2. 24. 선고 2009나117463 판결
[손해배상(의)][미간행]
Plaintiff, Appellant and Appellant

Plaintiff 1 and four others (Law Firm Barun, Attorneys Kim Jong-young et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Defendant, appellant and appellee

Asan Social Welfare Foundation (Attorney Shin Jae-ho et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

Conclusion of Pleadings

December 9, 2010

The first instance judgment

Seoul Eastern District Court Decision 2007Gahap2921 Decided November 5, 2009

Text

1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

A. The Defendant shall pay to Plaintiff 1 the amount of KRW 755,182,522, and KRW 15 million to Plaintiff 2, KRW 3, Plaintiff 4, and Plaintiff 5 each, as well as 5% per annum from March 23, 2004 to February 24, 2011, and 20% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment.

B. Each of the plaintiffs' remaining claims is dismissed.

2. Of the total litigation costs, 20% is borne by the Defendant, and the remainder by the Plaintiffs, respectively.

3. The portion of payment of the amount under paragraph (1) may be provisionally executed.

Purport of claim and appeal

1. Purport of claim

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 1 3,419,920,748 won, 2, 3, 4, and 5 100 million won each per annum from March 23, 2004 to the service date of a copy of the complaint of this case, and 5% per annum from the next day to the day of complete payment.

2. Purport of appeal

A. The plaintiffs: The part against the plaintiffs in the judgment of the court of first instance, which orders payment under the following, shall be revoked. The defendant shall pay to plaintiffs 1 2,416,344,052 won, 80 million won to plaintiffs 2, 3, 4, and 5 respectively, and 5% per annum from March 23, 2004 to the delivery date of a copy of the complaint of this case, and 20% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment.

B. Defendant: The part against the Defendant in the judgment of the first instance is revoked, and the Plaintiffs’ claims corresponding to the above revocation are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasoning for this Court’s explanation is as follows: (a) the reasoning for the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as the reasoning for the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the following parts among the reasoning for the judgment of the court of first instance; and (b) thus, it

2. Parts to be dried;

(a) each “80%” of the second sentence and the second sentence below on the 15th sentence of the first instance court shall be adjusted to “60%” respectively;

(b) have taken place the “973,576,696” of the last 18th sentence with “730,182,522 won”.

C. Plaintiff 1:30,000,000, b) Plaintiff 2: (a) Plaintiff 1:2:5 million won, b) Plaintiff 2:30,000,000 won in the first instance court’s decision, and (b) Plaintiff 2:5 million won, respectively.

D. Under the 20th judgment of the first instance court, the part of the “indembbes theory” up to the second day below is written as follows:

“F. Sub-committee”

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 1 75,182,522 (property damage 7.30,182,522 + 25 million won + consolation money for 15 million won, 3, 4, and 5 respectively, as consolation money for 15 million won to the plaintiff 2, and to pay damages for delay calculated at each rate of 20% per annum as stipulated by the Civil Act from March 23, 2004, which is the date when the accident of this case occurred until February 24, 2011, which is the date when the defendant made a substantial decision for the existence and scope of the obligation to perform, to the defendant from March 23, 2004 to February 24, 201, and to pay damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15 million won per annum as stipulated by the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the date of full payment.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiffs' claims of this case are justified within the above scope of recognition, and the remaining claims are dismissed without merit. Since the judgment of the court of first instance is unfair with some different conclusions, part of the defendant's appeal is accepted and the judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows. It is so decided as per Disposition.

[Attachment]

Judges Sung-mun (Presiding Judge)

arrow