(영문) 서울고등법원 2015.04.30 2014나3162 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울고등법원 2015.04.30 2014나3162

손해배상(의)

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

purport, purport, and.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The relationship between the parties is a patient who was conducted in the indic surgery and the indiculative surgery (hereinafter “the instant surgery”) by Defendant B (hereinafter “the instant hospital”), and Defendant C is a clinical pathology of the instant hospital.

B. 1) On August 24, 2009, the Plaintiff: (a) applied to the instant hospital on August 24, 2009 in order to undergo an operation to reduce the thickness of the arms and to mitigate the skin of the arms when both arms are put into the said hospital; (b) on the same day, Defendant B applied to the instant hospital for an operation to check the progress of the nivers removal surgery on August 26, 2009. (c) On the same day, the Plaintiff applied to the instant hospital for an operation to check the progress of the nivers removal surgery.

On the same day, Defendant B performed the instant surgery to the Plaintiff, used a pressure roof on the surgery department, and prescribed five percent of the spopic spopic spopic spoppy.

(A) The Plaintiff asserted that Defendant B lent money to the Plaintiff in the course of the instant surgery, but considering the overall purport of the pleadings in the written evidence No. 6, the nurses participating in the instant surgery stated that the Plaintiff did not have to face the Plaintiff in the course of the surgery. In light of the foregoing, it is insufficient to recognize that the written evidence and images of evidence No. 5 and No. 22 are insufficient to support that Defendant B caused the Plaintiff to face the Plaintiff during the instant surgery, and there is no other evidence to support them).

After the instant surgery, Defendant B confirmed on August 27, 2009 that the Plaintiff’s operation department was disinfected and removed, and that the operation department was clean. (2) Defendant B, on September 4, 2009, checked that the operation department was clean, and used the skin tape on the refusal of the operation department’s operation department, after checking on September 4, 2009 that the operation department was clean.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2013.11.26 2012가합57014

-서울중앙지방법원 2019.04.30 2016가단5211364

-수원지방법원 2016.12.06 2015가단139437

-대전지방법원 2015.10.21 2013가합3419

-서울고등법원 2013.01.17 2011나83242