beta
Text
1. The Defendants jointly share KRW 64,957,512 to Plaintiff A, and KRW 10,000,000 to Plaintiff B, respectively, and KRW 5,00,000 to Plaintiff C and D.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The status of the parties 1) Defendant School Foundation F (hereinafter “Defendant Corporation”)
G Hospital (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant Hospital”)
(2) The plaintiff Eul is the spouse, the plaintiff C, and the plaintiff Eul are the children of the plaintiff Eul. The plaintiff is the juristic person operating the plaintiff and the defendant Eul is the doctor working at the defendant hospital.
B. 1) On September 7, 2010, Plaintiff A was admitted to the Defendant Hospital on September 7, 2010 due to symptoms, such as a fluorry pain, a heart, and Gutototoo, and as a result of the first-wave test, Plaintiff A was hospitalized in the view of the right reception certificate (busheshesheshes to the right side), and the cT photographs on September 8, 2010, which led to the discovery of the receipt certificate of right, the 0.6 cm away from the right side, and the 0.6 cm away from the right side. 2) Defendant E could be removed from the Plaintiff’s absence, so, Plaintiff A was able to do so, and Plaintiff A did not have been absent from the school until September 9, 2010.
3) Defendant E: (a) around 08:40 on September 10, 2010, Defendant E: (b) the removal from absence due to the Plaintiff’s C’s need to do so (hereinafter “the removal from absence due to the Plaintiff’s need to do so”).
(1) In the process of the above operation, the Plaintiff did not remove absence in the process of the above operation, and instead converted it to an emergency, and performed the surgery for removal of absence from the family register (hereinafter “the instant re-rupture surgery”), and performed the re-rupture surgery, including the instant re-rupture removal from the family register and the instant re-rupture surgery.
(C) On November 2, 2010, the Plaintiff A completed the instant surgery at around 13:50, and returned to the ward room at around 15:30, and released the Plaintiff on September 21, 2010 after the process was observed. (c) On November 2, 2010, the Plaintiff A was at the Defendant Hospital and was at the time of the instant surgery and was found to have a compromise or pulmonary color of the officer in charge of the brupted trees established at the time of the instant surgery.