beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1...
Reasons
1. The reasoning for the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows. The court's reasoning for the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be as follows: (a) the sewage of the second, third, and fourth from the judgment of the court of first instance shall be read as the "examination sewage"; and (b) the defendant's argument that it is irrelevant to the second, third, and twenty from the "inward sewage" shall be read as the "inward sewage"; and (c) the defendant's argument that it is irrelevant to the second, fourth, and twenty from the judgment of the court of first instance shall be cited by the main sentence of Article 420
2. Parts to be determined additionally
A. (1) The defendant asserts that the symptoms of this case occurred only after the lapse of more than 10 months after the procedure of this case, and that the symptoms of this case are different from those of the part of the procedure of this case, and that the plaintiff did not assert and prove what kind of duty of care has been breached. Thus, the defendant's liability for the defendant is unreasonable.
Luxembourg In the case of claiming compensation for damages on the grounds that the medical practice of a doctor constitutes a tort due to the violation of the duty of care in the process, there should be causation between the negligence in the medical practice and the loss. The burden of proof is borne by the patient. However, since the medical practice is an area requiring highly professional knowledge, which is not an expert, and it is extremely difficult to clarify whether there was a violation of the duty of care in the medical process or whether there was a causation between the breach of the duty of care and the loss of the duty of care. Thus, if indirect facts are proved to prove that there was any other reason than the medical negligence in the course of surgery, if it is difficult to deem that there was any other reason than the medical negligence with respect to the occurrence of the symptoms, such symptoms are presumed to be medical negligence.