beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 20,697,980 for the Plaintiff and 5% per annum from June 21, 2013 to August 17, 2016.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On June 14, 2013, the Plaintiff visited the Defendant’s Csung surgery (hereinafter “Defendant’s Council member”) and consulted on the correction of protruding out. The Defendant recommended the Plaintiff to receive an extemptive surgery for the correction of protruding out.
B. On June 21, 2013, the Defendant performed a crypt surgery against the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff began to appeal to the symptoms, such as the following surgery: (a) pain was serious after the surgery; (b) eating food; and (c) the crypology was incorrect; (d) the Defendant would assist the Plaintiff in receiving correction treatment; and (e) the Plaintiff began to undergo correction treatment from around August 5, 2013.
C. The Plaintiff, while receiving a correction treatment from the DNA department, caused severe pain and inconvenience due to interference with the correction device, and removed the correction device on September 11, 2013, but thereafter, there were new symptoms that shaking a baby.
Since then, the Plaintiff was diagnosed as “child needs due to chronological infection and chronology,” and had undergone a procedure to fix the six chronology as a therapy for correction.
Even until now, the plaintiff is dissatisfied with symptoms such as misappropriation and fluor's summary.
[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, the result of the commission of physical appraisal to the Director of the F Hospital of this Court, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Summary of the plaintiff's assertion
A. The Defendant, prior to the execution of the instant sex surgery, has a duty of care to establish an accurate operation plan and avoid the outcome of the surgery by neglecting it, has been negligent in formulating an inappropriate operation plan by neglecting it, failing to record the plan necessary for the surgery in the medical records, and failing to prepare the operation record map at all, and has been negligent in violating the duty of care to establish an accurate operation plan.
B. The defendant created the plaintiff's place and moved space.