logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2015.10.15 2013가단206631
손해배상(의)
Text

1. The plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. The following facts do not conflict between the Parties:

On June 26, 2012, the deceased G was released from the G G University Hospital after receiving the crypical crypology for crypology treatment.

Aftermath of January 1, 2013, in the course of hospitalization, the nurse was transferred to a middle-patient's room due to the decline in oxygen and died at around 21:58 on the same day during the treatment process after taking a smoking measure for the removal of the nurse from the hospital around 18:25.

B. Plaintiff A is the wife of the deceased G, and the rest of the plaintiffs are the offspring of the deceased.

The Defendant Educational Institute is the operator of the above B-university Hospital, and Defendant E and Defendant F are the doctor of the above hospital and the father of the deceased.

2. Although Defendant E and F should have taken appropriate measures for the removal of the deceased who was deprived of cancer treatment, they caused the deceased's death by having a nurse without any experience take measures for the removal of the deceased without any particular measure, and caused the deceased's death, and the Defendant Educational Foundation B of the Republic of Korea (hereinafter the above Defendants are employers of the above Defendants, they should compensate for the damages jointly and severally suffered by the Plaintiffs ( funeral expenses of KRW 3 million, the deceased's consolation money of KRW 50 million, the consolation money of KRW 20,000,000,000,000 won, the consolation money of KRW 10,000,000,000,000 won, Plaintiff C's consolation money of KRW 1,00,000,000

3. The fact that blood transfusion occurred at the time when the Deceased was subject to measures for smoking on January 1, 2013 as to the occurrence of liability for damages is without dispute between the parties.

However, the above facts alone cannot be deemed to have been negligent in relation to the death of the deceased. The entries in Gap evidence Nos. 4, 7, and 8 and the result of the entrustment of appraisal to the president of the Korean Medical Association was negligent by the medical personnel, including the defendants, in the smoking process.

It is not enough to recognize that the deceased died due to the blood transfusion or the pulmonary color of an engine during the smoking process.

arrow