beta
Text
1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.
The Defendants: (a) each of them, and Plaintiff A, KRW 76,396,876; and (b) 64.
Reasons
Basic Facts
The reasoning for this Court’s explanation is as follows, and this part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, it is accepted by the main sentence of Article 420
C. On May 19, 201, the letter " May 19, 201" was written on May 2, 201, 15 of the 4th decision of the first instance court.
The first instance court’s first instance court’s 6th judgment (“based on recognition”) cited “the result of the request for the examination of medical records to the Seoul Medical Center of this Court” as “the result of the request for the examination of medical records to the director of the Seoul Medical Center of the first instance,” and read “the result of the request for the examination of medical records to the director of the Seoul Medical Center of the first instance,” and read “the result of the request for the physical examination of the director of the first instance court’s scarbia” as “the result of the request for the examination of the director of the hospital of the
In a case where a medical act by a physician of the instant surgery and a causal relationship becomes a tort due to a violation of the duty of care in the process, there should be causation between the negligence in the process of medical practice and the occurrence of damage. The burden of proof is borne by the patient. However, medical act is a field requiring highly specialized knowledge, and it is extremely difficult to find out whether there was a violation of the duty of care in the process of medical practice by a doctor, and whether there was a causal link between the breach of the duty of care and the occurrence of damage. Thus, if indirect facts are proved to prove that there was any other cause than the medical negligence in the course of surgery, if it is difficult to deem that there was any other cause than the medical negligence in the course of surgery, such evidence can be presumed to have been caused by medical negligence (see Supreme Court Decision 2010Da57787, May 9, 2012).