logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원부천지원 2015.08.19 2015가합101930
손해배상(의)
Text

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The status of the parties is the employer who employs the medical staff of the Defendant’s hospital while establishing and operating the Busan-si E Hospital (hereinafter “Defendant hospital”). The Plaintiff A (1932 students, women, and women) was treated and operated by the said F Hospital operated by the Defendant, and the Plaintiff B and C were children of the Plaintiff.

B. On October 28, 2010, Plaintiff A received an cerebrovascular CT test at the Defendant Hospital on the ground of a chronic pain on October 28, 2010. As a result of the test, Plaintiff A is a short blood relative connecting electric traffic transport connection, sub-component connection.

The term "non-hesion-type cerebral chronsis" means a disease that causes damage to the resistant resistant layer and the neutrona, which constitutes the inner side of the cerebral chronsis, and causes loss to the blood wall to form a new space within the mathal chrona.

Accordingly, on October 29, 2010, the G of the Defendant Hospital recommended the Plaintiff to be hospitalized and performed for the treatment of cerebral ties.

B) On November 1, 2010, Plaintiff A was hospitalized in the Defendant Hospital and undergone a close inspection of the RI and MOA brain cerebral cerebral Bribery. As a result, it was re-verificationd that the 12.5m wide x 5.4m high-frequency m high-speed chromosomes were formed in the electric transport route. (ii) Plaintiff A and Plaintiff C, their guardian, agreed to perform the operation of the cerebral chrochising surgery from Plaintiff G on November 1, 2010, after considering the explanation about the surgery of the cerebral chrosing surgery, the method of operation, merger, etc., and thereafter the implementation of the said operation. (ii) From around 209:25 to 120:0 on November 25, 2010, Plaintiff G opened two malanthal me to prevent the me from performing the surgery of the meanthal meanthal me.

(hereinafter “instant surgery”) performed.

3. Operation.

arrow