logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.08.24 2016가단5129984
손해배상(의)
Text

1. The Defendants jointly share KRW 65,540,511 with respect to the Plaintiff, and 5% per annum from August 5, 2013 to August 24, 2017.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 22, 2013, the Plaintiff: (a) participated in Ebrypt Ebrypt, implemented by Defendant C’s Dsung; and (b) participated in the Internet Blogs, subject to the condition that “after-the-job and Ebrogs publicity” be put on the Internet Blogs.

B. On August 5, 2013, the Plaintiff received from Defendant B, a doctor employed by Defendant C, 0.7C (F.15C) 0.7C (F.C. 0.15C) c) chinus in total.

After influoring the plaintiff's cirral end, the defendant B is algoruh.

No. 0.15cc. infusing 0.15cc to the end of the c and influorite on the following day.

- 0.4C Additional injecting 0.4C and melters.

(hereinafter “instant procedure”). C.

On August 8, 2013 and August 16, 2013, the Plaintiff was diagnosed at the Sungsung Hospital’s sexual surgery and received treatment, such as skin booming.

The Defendants paid 14,265,250 won to the Plaintiff for medical expenses in Seoul Sungsung Hospital.

As a result of the instant treatment, the Plaintiff suffered a change in two parts due to a decrease in the width of two parts on the right side of the part of the skin of the non-profit pel 2 x 1 mmmms from the right side, a non-profit pel stalms from the right side, and a change in two parts due to a decrease in the width of two parts on the right side.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant disability”). [Identification Evidence] The following facts are without dispute; Gap 1-8; Eul 1; and the result of the physical commission to the director of the medical school Symnae Hospital at the medical school at the research institute at the research institute at the research institute; the purport of the entire pleadings

2. Occurrence of and limitation on liability for damages;

A. According to the facts acknowledged prior to the occurrence of liability for damages, and each evidence, Defendant B neglected the Plaintiff’s duty of care to prevent the Plaintiff from taking a mustache into the blood body located on the part of the Plaintiff, etc., and in the instant procedure, caused the Plaintiff to a mustache and a mustache. Thus, the Defendants jointly committed a tort (the Defendant C’s employer liability) against the Plaintiff.

arrow