The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

The summary of the facts charged is that the defendant was the internal doctor of the ‘C' in B 2th floor of the racing-si. On June 26, 2012, the defendant examined the victim D (V, 72 years of age) in the above-mentioned department around 10:00, and inspected the victim's resistance to include the internal test equipment.

In such cases, the intention to conduct the internal inspection of the register shall be carried out by properly examining the inside of the register, and in particular, in the case of a patient with a high age, the wall of the register is cut off, so it shall be carried out with careful attention so that there is no tent by putting the large wall into the register, and in the case where there is a tent in the house register with the father of the household affairs.

Even if so, there is a duty of care to diagnose the master on the basis of the symptoms and to take necessary measures if there is an expansion of clothes to the patient.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and caused the death of approximately 1 cm in the victim’s Sack book by inserting the above equipment with the negligence of failing to diagnose the ceiling, even after the Defendant neglected it, and caused the death of the victim from the shock shock and the multiple growth engine at the F Hospital located in Busan, Seo-gu, Busan, which was under the follow-up treatment on August 3, 2012.

Judgment

1. The gist of the defendant's and defense counsel's assertion was not only one minute after the victim inspected the internal diameter of the registry, and thus, the defendant found 10cm near the upper 10cm away from the workplace, and immediately suspended the internal diameter.

The defendant did not have any official furnished with the ledger in the course of conducting the internal border examination against the victim, and the family defendant sent a ceiling to the ledger.

Even if the defendant is negligent in the course of business or has a causal relationship between the defendant's death and the chief's death.

subsection (b) of this section.

2. Determination

A. The relevant legal doctrine is negligent on the part of a doctor in a medical accident.

In order to do so, it was possible to predict and avoid the occurrence of the outcome.