logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
인천지방법원 2018.11.02 2016가단204973
손해배상(의)
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The defendant is a juristic person operating C Hospital (the trade name before the change: D hospital; hereinafter the "Defendant Hospital"), and the plaintiff is a person who undergoes drilling removal, 3-4, 4-5, 3-5, 3-5, 3-5, 3-5, 3-5, 4, and 4-5, from the doctor non-party E belonging to the defendant hospital.

B. On January 30, 2008, the Plaintiff was faced with head at the so-called “instant accident” (hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”) at the construction site of the Defendant Hospital, with the Plaintiff’s head at the so-called concrete marg for support with the safety mother at the construction site of the Defendant Hospital.

2) On February 20, 2008, the Plaintiff was hospitalized in the Defendant Hospital on February 20, 2008 due to the instant accident (i.e., “the decline in both sides and the decline in both sides,” and (ii) the Plaintiff was hospitalized in the Defendant Hospital.

As stated in paragraph (1), the instant surgery was performed on February 22, 2008.

C. On April 12, 201, the Plaintiff, including medical treatment at another hospital, was found to have “hiveropic pathal pathic pathic pathic pathic pathic pathic pathic mathic mathic mathic mathic mathic mathic

The Plaintiff’s current state 1) The Plaintiff now complained of MFI images implemented prior to the instant surgery against the Plaintiff and MF images taken by G Hospital around 201, compared with the Plaintiff’s MaI images taken by G Hospital around 201, the e-7 e-mail change is proceeding due to the passage of time. At the time of the instant physical appraisal, the Plaintiff’s opinion on the e-mail symptoms on the both sides and the left-hand e-7 e-mail symptoms were improved compared to around 201.

[Ground of recognition] without any dispute, Gap evidence 1, 3, Gap evidence 4-1, Gap evidence 9-1, 2, and Gap evidence 10, the result of physical appraisal commissioned to the head of H Hospital and the result of fact inquiry, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's assertion is the plaintiff's negligence in surgery of E, a medical doctor belonging to the defendant hospital.