beta
Text
1. The Defendants jointly share KRW 65,675,740 with respect to the Plaintiff and the period from July 29, 2013 to October 31, 2019.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On July 29, 2013, at a hospital operated by Defendant C (hereinafter “Defendant C Hospital”), the Plaintiff received from Defendant B a luminous dynasium reduction surgery and sect for cosmetic purposes (hereinafter “instant surgery”).
B. On October 23, 2015, the Plaintiff was provided medical treatment to the E University’s F Hospital Hospital’s dental department by referring to the gymnasium, on the grounds of the following entrance, the level of secta, and the pains. On November 3, 2015, the Plaintiff was provided treatment to the E University Dental Hospital by gymnasium. On December 18, 2015, the Plaintiff was provided medical treatment on the ground of the gymnasium’s left side, and the gymnasium was administered on the basis of the gymnasium.
In addition, around March 18, 2016, the Plaintiff was diagnosed as a substitute for a long time of movement in the E-university’s sexual surgery from the E-university’s E-university’s sexual surgery due to the neutic damage.
C. At present, the Plaintiff is suffering from the current left-hand cat and chining, at least at least at least at a level of the right-hand cat and chin, at least at a certain level, and such a disability is presumed to be permanent.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 2 and 3 (including the paper numbers), the result of the commission of physical examination to the G Hospital Head of this Court, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Establishment of liability for damages;
A. The plaintiff's assertion that Defendant B caused damage to the plaintiff's sub-pathal pathal disorder in the course of performing the instant surgery, and did not take appropriate and necessary measures against the symptoms of damage occurring after the surgery.
In addition, the Defendant did not explain the possibility of the aftermathic damage, etc. prior to the instant veterinary surgery, thereby infringing on the Plaintiff’s right to self-determination regarding the choice of surgery.
Therefore, Defendant B is a tort, and Defendant C is an employer of Defendant B, and the Defendants jointly have a duty to compensate for the Plaintiff’s property and mental damages arising from the instant surgery.
(b).