The extent of proof of personnel relations in the case of death after the medical officer of the correctional institution provides medical treatment.

Even if the medical officer in prison died after the termination of the contract which was caused by the plenary session, there is no liability for damages unless it proves the causal relationship between the operation and death.

Article 750 of the Civil Act

Cho Man-hee et al.

Korea

Seoul Central District Court (77Gahap2625) in the first instance trial

Each appeal by the plaintiff, etc. is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff, etc.

The judgment of the court below shall be revoked.

The defendant shall pay 40,274,446 won to the plaintiff Cho Ho-hee, the plaintiff creation studies, and the plaintiff Cho So-young an amount of 50,000 won per annum from June 14, 1977 to the full payment day.

The judgment that all the costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant in the first and second trials.

On June 14, 197, 197, the fact that the plaintiff Cho Jong-hee was released from the execution suspension order on June 15, 197 on the next day by the recommendation to suspend the execution of the defendant Cho Jong-hee's disease of the military hospital of the above prison on June 14, 197. In full view of the testimony of the court below and the judge of the court below on June 16, 197, the following day after the date when the plaintiff Cho Jong-hee was released from the above prison, the plaintiff Cho Jong-hee was discharged from the above prison. In full view of the testimony of the Lee Jong-hee's written evidence No. 2 without dispute, it can be acknowledged that the plaintiff Cho Jong-hee was discharged from the above prison, and was hospitalized into the Sung-si Hospital's hospital of the above prison, and was discharged from the emergency chillic surgery for the corrective agricultural treatment, but the time of the operation had been delayed, and there is no reflect evidence.

원고등은, 원고 조능희가 위와 같은 영구적 하반신마비의 원인이 된 경추농양증에 걸리게 된 것은 위 교도소의무관 오태정이 1977.5.20. 위 원고의 우측 귓밥에 생긴 작은 종기를 절개수술할 때 의료기구의 소독을 철저히 하지 않아 병균이 침입하게 하는등 주의를 다하지 아니함으로 인하여 발생하였을 뿐만 아니라, 또 위 수술후부터 위 원고가 요통과 고열이 계속되는 등 경추농양의 증세를 나타내었음에도 불구하고 위 오태정은 이를 단순한 감기증상으로 오진하고 방치 하였다가 1977.6.13. 위 원고가 전신통증과 양 하지마비현상이 일어나 실신하기에 이르자 다시 진찰을 하였으나 그때에도 정학한 진단을 못하고 급성화농성뇌척수막염이라고 오진하여 그 다음날인 1977.6.14.에야 의병 형 집행정지 건의를 함으로써 동인으로 하여금 그 다음날인 1977.6.15. 16:40경에야 형 집행정지 결정을 받고 그 아버지인 원고 조성학에게 인도되게 해서 위 경추농양의 치료를 위한 경추궁절제수술의 시기를 놓치게 한 결과 위 원고의 경추농양증의 완치가 불가능하게 하고, 그로 인하여 위 원고에게 하반신완전마비등 영구적 후유증을 남게 하였다고 주장하므로 먼저, 위 원고의 경추농양증이 위 오태정의 위 원고에 대한 귓밥종기 수술 잘못으로 인하여 생겼다는 원고 주장에 관하여 보건대, 당심증인 오태정의 증언에 의하여 진정성립이 인정되는 을 제1,2호증의 각 기재내용과 같은 증인의 증언을 종합하면, 위 오태정이 1977.5.20. 원고 조능희의 귓밥에 생긴 작은 종기를 절개수술한 사실은 이를 인정할 수 있으나, 그 수술이 잘못 되었다거나 또는 그로 인하여 위 원고의 경추농양증이 생겼다고 인정할 수 있는 아무런 증거가 없고, 오히려 위에 인용한 증거등에 의하면 위 원고에 대한 종기 절개수술은 아무 후유증을 남기지 않고 같은달 26일 완치된 사실을 인정할 수 있다.

Then, as to the plaintiff's assertion that early detection of the above plaintiff's scopic copic scopic copic copic copic copic copic copic copic copic copic copic copic copic copic copic copic checopic copic copic copic copic copic copicscopic copicscopic copicscopic copicscopic copicscopic copicscopic copicscopic copicscopic copicscopic climaticscopic copic copic copic copic copicscopic copicscopic copicscopic copicscopic copic copicscopic copicscopic copicscopics

If the background leading up to the occurrence, treatment, and suspension of execution of the plaintiff Cho-hee is the same as above, it cannot be deemed that there was negligence on the part of the above plaintiff without finding the correct name of the above plaintiff. In addition, it cannot be deemed that there was any error in the process of recommending the treatment and suspension of execution of a punishment of the above plaintiff. Rather, on June 13, 1977, the above mentioned person took clinical diagnosis to the extent possible in the above plaintiff's prison by coping with the rapid change of the hospital's disease, and took clinical diagnosis to the extent possible in the above prison, and took measures that can be taken as a result of the following day because it is not good, and thus, recommendation to suspend the execution of the sentence was made as the next day.

Therefore, the plaintiff Cho Jong-hee's claim for this case, which is based on the premise that the plaintiff Cho Tae-hee was negligent in causing negligence in the operation of the above plaintiff's completion period against the above plaintiff, or that the plaintiff Cho Tae-hee was negligent in failing to take measures to cope with the plaintiff's injury after early diagnosis of the name of the Byungyangyang at the above time, shall be dismissed without any further examination as to other points. Thus, the judgment of the court below that concluded as above is just and without merit, and each appeal by the plaintiff et al. is dismissed, and the costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the losing party.

Judge Advice (Presiding Judge)