2013 Ghana 47592 Damage

A person shall be appointed.

Jeonjin-gu Kucheon-dong 1

Seoul High Court Decision 201Du146 delivered on June 1, 201

Attorney Kim Jong-soo et al.*

A person shall be appointed.

Jeon Ji-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government

Attorney Kang Jae-soo, Counsel for the defendant

April 19, 2016

May 25, 2016

1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 17,031, 885 won, and 5% per annum from January 9, 2014 to May 25, 2016, and 15% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

3. One-third of the costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff, and the remainder by the Defendant, respectively.

4. Paragraph 1 can be provisionally executed.

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 27,050, 259 won with 20% interest per annum from the day following the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case to the day of complete payment.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Status of the party

The defendant is a patient who has received medical treatment from the defendant hospital in the Jeonjin-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter referred to as the "Defendant hospital"), and the plaintiff is a patient who has received medical treatment from the defendant hospital.

B. Progress of treatment at the Defendant Hospital

1) On April 19, 2013, a bankruptcy-related bankruptcy-related bankruptcy-related bankruptcy-related bankruptcy-related bankruptcy-related bankruptcy-related urology, the Plaintiff: (a) around 11, 201, the left-hand urology was found to be click, and (b) the left-hand urgical body was located in the Defendant hospital, the left-hand urgical body was found to be arged; (c) the Defendant conducted a radiation inspection and conducted a 3-day medical prescription; and (d) the Defendant conducted a surgic fever treatment (only lact), in-depth heat treatment (the surgicoptym), surgic current treatment, and surgic towing treatment (the surgic body) at the physical clinic of the Defendant hospital.

2) On April 22, 2013: around 54, 2013, the Plaintiff: (a) 15:54, the left-hand president, but the left-hand president was still released, and (b) the Defendant applied to the Defendant hospital; and (c) upon prescribing four-day drugs, the Defendant was given the first high-ranking medical treatment at the physical clinic of the Defendant hospital, to undergo the stratotoo, in-depth heat treatment, and interference current treatment.

The plaintiff had a sense of urology to the physical clinic D of the defendant hospital, and it was difficult for him to view urine urine urine urine urine urine urine urine urine, and D had the plaintiff put the horses into a new state, put about 50cm in the distance of the plaintiff's left-hand urine urine urine urine urine urine, and the strength was weak.

After about 20 minutes, the physical clinic E of the Defendant Hospital found any damage to the parts of the Plaintiff’s left her body, etc., and the Plaintiff said that there was no awareness of the Plaintiff’s physical clinic F. The assistant nurse G of the Defendant Hospital was in the medical clinic and was able to return to the Plaintiff at the time of emergency video treatment.

3) On April 24, 2013, the Plaintiff was hospitalized in the Defendant Hospital for 11 days from April 24, 2013 to May 3, 2013, and received a diagnosis of the 2-do image (ash 5cm x 5cm x 5cm) on the left-hand light, such as the left-hand light at the Defendant Hospital.

(c) Progress of medical treatment at a H hospital;

1) On May 3, 2013, the Plaintiff was hospitalized at H Hospital upon the diagnosis of the left ray, etc. 2-3 degrees of image and skin loss by the H Hospital, and was hospitalized at H Hospital on May 7, 2013, and was in effect on July 2, 2013 (15cc x 5cc x 10cm).

2) The Plaintiff received hospitalized treatment at H Hospital for 83 days from May 3, 2013 to July 24, 2013, and received outpatient treatment from July 24, 2013 to August 3, 2013.

D. Current state of the Plaintiff

At present, the plaintiff is in a state in which the 12cm x 8cm cm heading in the upper left line (16cm if it is included in the surrounding reflect x 12cm) and the 13cm heading in the right buckbucking place x 9cm heading off the skin giving box x 9cm, and the 2, 3, 4, and 5 cm heading toward the upper left line is in a state in which movement is restricted.

(e) Relevant medical knowledge;

1) In the urinary urology, the oxygen room is the most shaking symptoms. It is golding to put a heat to a dead body with a cooling room. If preventive measures are failed, a trabal and vexal pathic disease occurs, and if early treatment is not appropriate, a monitic and vexical vexical vexical vexical vexical vexical vexical vexical vexical vexical vex

2) In the case of the elderly patients, they should be careful to avoid spreadings or images at the time of the mathalosis, and in particular, they should be careful not to generate cardio-cerebral disease or mathic disease when there is a mathal disease.

The elderly patients should pay attention to the aggravation of symptoms in the event of a serious hot-resistant treatment.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, 9, 11, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 3, 5

(including) the witness F’s testimony, and the request for appraisal of medical records to the Director of the Chungcheongnam-nam University Hospital of this Court

As a result of the commission of physical examinations to the Head of the Jeonnam University Hospital of this Court, the entire pleadings

purport of this chapter

2. Parties’ assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion

1) Violation of the duty of care in the use of an outpatient.

The plaintiff is a patient suffering from cather, and when he/she uses a physical therapy that is likely to images due to high temperature, he/she withdraws measures to prevent risks by giving more attention to ordinary patients than normal patients.

In spite of the fact that both horses were newly treated by using an out-of-the-counter therapy, and it was found that the Plaintiff did not verify the Plaintiff’s condition while treating them, and that the Defendant suffered the images after completing treatment, and the Defendant breached its duty of care in the process of physical treatment.

2) The Plaintiff’s negligence in early treatment of the images

After the occurrence of the instant images, the Defendant should have taken into account the Plaintiff’s side image condition, but the Defendant returned to the Defendant, who is a assistant nurse at the Defendant’s hospital, after treating the Defendant’s stude. On April 24, 2013, the assistant nurse at the time of the visit to the Defendant hospital, tried to open the Plaintiff’s home care in the hospital, thereby disinfection of the Plaintiff’s nursing assistant at the emergency room only when the Plaintiff resisted. Although the doctor should undergo a diagnosis and treatment of images, the medical nurse’s clinic’s medical examination and treatment period led to the aggravation of the Plaintiff’s symptoms.

3) Calculation of damages

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff the amount of KRW 10, 764, 670, the amount of KRW 6, 759, 769, the amount of future treatment expenses of KRW 4,525, 820, the sum of KRW 5,00,000, KRW 27,050, and KRW 259, and delay damages.

B. The defendant's assertion

1) The Defendant, based on professional knowledge and experience at the time of treating the Plaintiff, performed physical treatment to the Plaintiff according to the ordinary procedure and method of treatment. In the process of physical treatment, the Plaintiff’s unforeseeable side effects have occurred due to the Plaintiff’s non-compliance with the instructions of the physical treatment physician in charge of the Defendant hospital.

2 ) 2013 . 4 . 22 . 물리치료가 끝난 후 원고의 증상은 피부가 벌겋게 된 정도로 그리 심각하지 아니한 상태였다 . 그 다음날 피고 병원에 내원하여 치료받을 것을 권하 였으나 원고가 이를 무시하고 치료받지 아니하였다가 그 다음날 증상이 더 악화된 상 태에서 피고 병원에 내원하였다 . 피고는 원고의 화상부위 치료를 위하여 통상적인 치 료방법에 따라 최선을 다하였으나 원고가 기왕증인 당뇨 , 척추협착증으로 인하여 차도 가 더딘 상태였고 , 원고의 증상은 항생제 치료후 피부이식이 필요한 상태라고 보호자 에게 설명하여 피고의 의료상의 과실이 있다고 할 수 없다 .

3. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. Determination as to the assertion of breach of duty of care in the course of physical therapy

In full view of the following circumstances revealed by the aforementioned evidence and the purport of the entire pleadings, the defendant was negligent in failing to take preventive measures to prevent images by exceeding clothes, such as both horses, etc., and by conducting several inspections during the treatment process, and the defendant's negligence resulted in the occurrence of the plaintiff's image due to the above negligence, so the defendant's negligence is reasonable in relation to the plaintiff's image. Thus, the above defendant's negligence is reasonable in relation to the plaintiff's image.

(1) The treatment of an outboard vessel is a treatment method that reduces pain by heating on the part of the State. As such, it is possible to avoid heat damage when the sense of satisfy inception is excessive to normal heat.

In cases of patients with diseases accompanied by a sense of sense, such as urology, etc., the skin condition of the recipient shall be checked from time to time to time to prevent heat damage compared to ordinary patients.

② Even in cases where protecting devices are installed in return when using an outboard vessel, it is appropriate to put the protective device that does not place pressure, such as duplicating, rather than pressure. In cases where there are clothes that are different in the structure of the skin and physical properties of the skin, caution for using the outboard vessel may vary, and in cases of a patient with a disease accompanied by a sense of sense, reaction may be uncomponent, so it is safe to conduct an outboard vessel investigation while removing the clothes.

③ On April 19, 2013, at the time of the Plaintiff’s visit to the Plaintiff’s hurgical and leg, the water treatment physician provided hurgical therapy by having the Plaintiff contact with the Plaintiff’s hurgical and legine, and on April 22, 2013, the Plaintiff again asked D before receiving physical treatment at the Defendant hospital that the Plaintiff had a very hot sense of hurgical hurging by having the Plaintiff contact with the hurgal, because there was no sense of hurgical hurgical hurging. However, D only provided oral hurgical hurgical hurgical hurgical hurgical hurgical hurgical hurgical hurgical hurgical hurgical hurgical hurgical hurgical hurgical hurgical hurgical hurging the Defendant’s hurg.

B. Determination as to the assertion of breach of duty of care in the course of treatment of images

In full view of the following circumstances revealed by the aforementioned evidence and the purport of the entire pleadings, it is reasonable to deem that the treatment at the Defendant Hospital was performed according to the Plaintiff’s condition and the level of medical practice being performed in the field of clinical medicine at the time, and that it was an act within the reasonable discretion recognized by the doctor. It is insufficient to recognize that the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone was negligent in taking measures against the Plaintiff’s image, and there is no evidence to acknowledge otherwise. The Plaintiff’s assertion on this part is without merit.

① In the case of a national film, the general method of treatment was an antibiotic product for the prevention of appropriate visual scams and infections. The Defendant hospital continued to provide a video scam, and the Defendant hospital treated an antibiotic product as appropriate in light of the Plaintiff’s symptoms.

(2) In cases of severe images, their depth and degree may be grasped immediately, but minor one degrees, and two degrees.

In the case of a shot image, there are many cases where the status of the Defendant C's portrait could be known after a lapse of one to three days, and in the case of a shot promotion, the degree of the image is deepened as the number of days elapsed than the degree of clinical identification in the early stage of the image. However, even if the Plaintiff's return is about 3 degrees of image, so even if the head of the shot is under way, it is not much different in the initial place of the image, so it is appropriate that Defendant C's early shot therapy was proper.

③ Since approximately one week after the video was taken, most of the images could be grasped, and the degree of image is deepened as a result of the lapse of one week, it is difficult to anticipate the occurrence of bad result at the time when the plaintiff was treated at the defendant hospital, and even if the occurrence of bad result was predicted at the time of the treatment, it is difficult to take other measures to prevent the skin from being affected, in addition to the appropriate visual and antibiotics treatment.

④ Since there is a tendency that the degree of images will grow in depth compared to ordinary visual patients due to complications, we need to observe more carefully, and as there is a case where a small level of body condition is rapidly heartd in the case of a urine patient, we need to carefully observe the progress of the Defendant hospital while implementing the urine and the blood transfusion with respect to the Plaintiff.

C. Limitation on liability

In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the aforementioned evidence and the purport of the entire pleading, namely, where there is a sense of sense in case of a urology patient accompanied by a neologic merger certificate, the risk of video generation increases more than that of the case. The Plaintiff’s act at the time of physical treatment shows the distance between the urology and the urology treatment apparatus by setting up the left-hand edge on the right-hand side at the time of physical treatment. Such act of the Plaintiff can be the cause of the video of this case, and the Plaintiff’s urology seems to have affected the degree and treatment of the video of this case. Considering the above circumstances, considering the above circumstances, it is consistent with the ideology of the damage compensation system that provides the fair and reasonable division of damages. Accordingly, the Defendant’s responsibility is limited to 70% of the total amount of damages.

4. Scope of liability for damages

(a) Expenses for medical treatment;

1) An amount of expenditure: 10,764,670 won for medical expenses at a H hospital from May 3, 2013 to July 24, 2013;

[Ground of recognition] Gap evidence No. 6 and the purport of the whole pleading

2) In the amount of hospitalization 5, 680, 000 won, non-benefit items 5, 680

Unless special circumstances exist, such as that the victim of a tort, who was hospitalized in a general hospital, was forced to undergo treatment by being hospitalized in a hospital due to the nature of the medical treatment in question, or that he/she was forced to use a superior hospital due to the lack of a general hospital, the damage equivalent to the amount of the tort and the amount of damage equivalent to the amount of the hospitalization (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da51406, Nov. 25, 2010).

According to the statement of evidence No. 6, the Plaintiff’s additional charges for the use of his hospital room for the period from May 3, 2013 to July 24, 2013, 2013 can be acknowledged as constituting 5,680,00. However, according to the overall purport of the statement of evidence No. 13 as well as the oral argument, it was difficult for the Plaintiff to take into account the following circumstances, i.e., the core 2-3 degrees of the upper left-hand side 2-3 degrees of video treatment and visual sprinking, and partial sprinking, which were 64 years old at the time when the Plaintiff was hospitalized in the H hospital, and the Plaintiff was unable to take into account the following special circumstances: (a) the Plaintiff’s health care room for the use of his hospital room for the first time; and (b) the Plaintiff did not appear to have been accompanied by the comprehensive management of the Plaintiff’s 64 years old and low-level infection and the lower-level infection.

(b) Wronking expenses;

1) Necessity and extent of the opening

In full view of the records in Gap evidence No. 14, the results of the physical examination of the Jeonnam University Hospital Head of this court and the purport of the entire pleadings, the plaintiff was at the time of being hospitalized in H Hospital, who was suffering from low blood transfusions, frequent snow deaths, was unable to walk by pictures such as left-hand rays, etc., and was in need of care due to the act of prescribing wheel chairs, which makes it difficult for the plaintiff to walk. In light of the degree of the opening, it is determined that the opening of 24 hours per day of adult during the period of hospitalization is necessary, and in fact, this title, the plaintiff's spouse, has been the same.

2) Calculation: 6,759,769 won (the amount calculated on the basis of the number of 24 hours per adult for 83 days from May 3, 2013 to July 24, 2013, the period of hospitalization in this case) = 81,443 won x83 days).

(c) Expenses for future treatment;

According to the results of this Court’s physical examination of the president of the Jeonnam University Hospital and the purport of the entire pleadings, the Plaintiff, upon receiving an influoral surgery, is fluoral and fluoral fluoral flusium.

As a matter of course, we need to see the above milk and receive local transplant in that space, and can recognize that the expenses incurred in 4,525,820 won. Since there is no assertion or proof as to the fact that the above medical expenses were spent by the closing date of the pleading in this case, it is deemed that the expenses were paid on April 20, 2016, the day following the closing date of the pleading in this case, and that the expenses were paid on April 3, 949, 683 won when calculating the current price at the time of the accident in accordance with the Hofman Accounting Act.

(d) limitation on liability;

A person shall be appointed.

1) The defendant's ratio of liability: 70%

2) Calculation: 15,031, 885 won [(10, 764, 670 won for early treatment + 6,759, 769 won for early treatment + 3,949, 683 won for future treatment) x 70%];

(e) Condolence money;

1) Reasons for taking into account: The Plaintiff’s age and family relation, the background and result of the instant accident, the medical warning and period, the degree of pains, the left-hand bucks and reflects of the right-hand bucks left by video legacy, and all other circumstances shown in the instant argument.

2) Amount determined: 2,00,000 won

F. Sub-committee

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum under the Civil Act from January 9, 2014, the day following the delivery date of a copy of the complaint of this case sought by the Plaintiff, which is 17,031,885 won ( = Property damage 15,031,885 won + 2,000,000 won) and after the date of the tort of this case, to the Plaintiff, to the extent that the Defendant disputes about the existence and scope of the Defendant’s duty of performance from January 9, 2014 until May 25, 2016, which is the date of the decision of this case, 5% per annum under the Civil Act until May 25, 2016, and from the following day to the day of full payment.

5. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is accepted within the scope of the above recognition, and the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Park Gyeong-ok