logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2020.02.14 2018고단4247
업무상과실치상
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of one million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a dentist, and the victim B(54) is a patient.

At around 16:00 on April 11, 2018, the defendant, who is in the Government-Si of the Gyeonggi-si, had the victim undergo a crypt operation from the "D values operated by the defendant in the Government-Si of the Gyeonggi-si."

Inasmuch as small organizations, such as franchisers, can easily extinguish in the mouth and fall into the mouth, dentists have a duty of care to prevent them from entering the drum or foreign substances into the mouth of the patient in advance by inserting the drum or installing them in the drums of the patient.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected to do so and failed to cover the screen screen (1.7 cm) or to install a studs, etc. in the part of the injured party, and caused the nurse to fall into the mouth of the injured party by failing to leave the said equipment in the process of receiving the screen screen drums from the injured party’s mouth.

Ultimately, the Defendant suffered injury to the victim due to the above occupational negligence, such as acute dynassis in the treatment days.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Witnesses B and E each legal testimony;

1. The police statement concerning B;

1. A medical certificate, brusical photo (No. 15 No. 5 of the evidence list);

1. Written reply - F replys, related thesis 1, and related thesis 2;

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted to the effect that there is no occupational negligence on the part of the defendant, and that there is no special causal relationship between the defendant's act and the defendant's act, since the nurse has damaged screen dracks, and the defendant has taken follow-up measures such as taking the victim's dracker in an emergency room.

However, in full view of the following circumstances admitted by the evidence duly adopted and examined by this Court:

arrow