logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2016.10.14 2016가단102965
손해배상(의)등
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim against the defendants is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. On May 19, 2015, the Plaintiff: (a) at the C Hospital located in the Kimhae-si, Kim Jong-si discovered a dypology in the right part; (b) transferred the dypology to Yangsan National University Hospital operated by the Defendant Busan National University Hospital; (c) on May 29, 2015, the Plaintiff received dypology removal from Defendant B using the dypology (hereinafter “instant surgery”); and (d) Defendant B removed the dypology on the left part of the left part as well as the right part of the dypology discovered.

2. Determination as to the claim against the defendant Busan National University Hospital and B

A. The plaintiff, which caused the plaintiff, requested the defendant B to not remove the left-hand question, and the defendant B also failed to remove the left-hand question, but the defendant B removed the problem to the left-hand question without explanation as to the possibility of removal of the left-hand question. The plaintiff suffered mental damage due to the defendant B's negligence and the violation of the duty to explain, and thus, the defendant Busan National University Hospital, which is the defendant B and its employer, is liable to compensate the plaintiff for the damage caused by the loss.

B. The judgment of the court below is not sufficient to acknowledge that Defendant B performed both 1-1 and 1-7, 2-2, and witness D’s testimony without explaining that Defendant B would remove only the right dysium to the Plaintiff before the instant operation, or remove both dysium on either side, without explaining that Defendant B performed both dysium removal before the instant operation, and that there is no other evidence (the Plaintiff cited the two pages of the written consent (No. 6), but it is difficult to see that the picture is the evidence of the diagnosis dysium removal as evidence; rather, the document 1-1, 1-1, 1-7, 2, 3, and 6-1, 1-1, and 1-1, 1-2, 3, and 6, respectively, and the following circumstances, which are acknowledged by considering the overall purport of the arguments as follows:

arrow