logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2019.05.14 2017가단6593
손해배상(의)
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 5,00,000 and the Plaintiff’s annual amount from February 23, 2017 to May 14, 2019.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

가. 원고는 미용실을 운영하는 사람으로 2017. 1. 12. 피고가 운영하는 C(이하 ‘피고 의원’이라 한다)에서 피고로부터 코기둥과 코끝에 캐뉼라를 사용하여 HA필러(Hyaluronic Acid Filler) 1cc 및 리프팅실 20개를 주입하는 시술과 코볼에 보톡스를 시행하는 시술(이하 ‘이 사건 시술’이라 한다)을 각 받았다.

B. On the following day of the instant procedure, the Plaintiff was able to observe a hole at the bottom, etc. of the flusium, and was given a high frequency surgery and hot water treatment to Coin as a result of a flusing on the part of the flusium, and was given soup.

C. On January 16, 2017, the Plaintiff complained of and filed again to Defendant Council members for the pain and side fluorries of the treatment department. At the time, the Plaintiff was at the right Corball.

Therefore, the defendant's member of the National Assembly is about the part of the plaintiff's salt certificate.

Using the ASEAN, melters were treated for injection, secondary regeneration injection (PDN injection) and blood transfusion expansion. D.

According to the results of physical appraisal against the plaintiff, the plaintiff is now showing a balm reflect of the length of about 3 meters on the right side, and there are several places of non-distribution, and if the plaintiff wishes, the situation will be improved through an operational treatment related to reflect and transformation (total treatment cost of KRW 600,000).

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap1 to 4 evidence, the result of the commission of physical examination to the director of Busan University Hospital, the result of the commission of each medical record appraisal to the director of the Korea Medical Dispute Mediation and Arbitration Agency of this Court, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. After the plaintiff's argument was made, the plaintiff's coin and the severe salt was caused by the plaintiff's coin and the plaintiff's error in the defendant's procedure was caused by the side effect resulting from the blood shielding.

Accordingly, the plaintiff's cirm part and the cirm part that begins in both sides of the face.

arrow