logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2015.05.29 2013가합4029
손해배상(의)
Text

1. On December 12, 2011, the Defendant: (a) filed a claim against Plaintiff A for KRW 5,00,000 and each of the said amounts with respect to KRW 256,792,319, Plaintiff B, and C, respectively.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The status of the parties is that the Defendant is a juristic person operating the New Village Symnae Hospital (hereinafter “Defendant Hospital”), and the Plaintiff is a person who received a conical or extegrative test from the Defendant Hospital, and the Plaintiff B and C are the children of Plaintiff A.

B. A around September 201, Plaintiff A received treatment in the “D-type external department”, etc. with the back and two shoulder fluories, the left fluories, etc. on the left side. On November 14, 11, Plaintiff A was hospitalized in the “E Hospital” on the ground that the Defendant Hospital’s medical team applied to the outpatients of the Defendant Hospital on November 22, 199. As a result of MRI’s test, the medical team of the Defendant Hospital recommended the Defendant Hospital to perform the MO-4, 4-5, 5-6 conical signboard escape symptoms, the 3-4-5, and the 3-4-5, and the sluxical glusium was recommended, and there was no specific error in glusium or glusence, function, etc. until the time of the surgery.

3) On December 12, 201, the medical personnel of the Defendant Hospital performed the “porizontal and pactical convergence” (e.g., removal of hydropeache nuclear power and repactivity) with the Plaintiff on December 12, 201 (hereinafter “instant surgery”).

4) However, since the completion of the instant surgery, the Plaintiff’s medical personnel at the Defendant Hospital was seriously infinite compared to the upper region due to the occurrence of salvary expenditure to the Plaintiff, and the medical personnel at the Defendant Hospital directly opened and confirm whether there is a problem on the operation on the same day, and removed a small amount of blood transfusion and re-finded after saleing, but the Plaintiff’s condition was not improved.

5 Plaintiff A, compared to the right-hand side of December 23, 2011, had been tried before the rehabilitation department of the Defendant hospital in the state where the urology is so severe that the left-hand side, the urbial urbial urbium cannot walk or walk, and the urbial urbling function has been deteriorated, and the rehabilitation treatment for strengthening the urbology has been provided on January 31, 2012.

arrow