logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2017.04.11 2015나24661
손해배상(의)
Text

1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The return of the provisional payment to the Defendant, and the Plaintiff A shall be KRW 232,940,927;

Reasons

Basic Facts

The parties concerned are the PESD (Perstoscopic Libery) procedure or internal catho nuclear control procedure at the Tol University Spane Hospital operated by the Defendant (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant Hospital”).

It is a procedure to eliminate a protruding disc by using the internal diameter while monitoring it after inserting the internal diameter to reach a disc.

Plaintiff B is the husband of Plaintiff A, while Plaintiff B is the husband of Plaintiff A.

Since August 2003, Plaintiff A, who had been receiving treatment prior to the instant surgery, was scambly scambly scambly and left-hand, applied to an individual hospital located around his residence in September 2003, and was receiving physical treatment, towing treatment, etc. under the diagnosis of post-sign escape, but applied to the Defendant Hospital on October 9, 2003, when the situation was not improved.

Plaintiff

A had not been implemented on the day of internal inspection but had a positive response in 60∑ the left-hand side, and as a result of the Doarar calendar test, the Doar calendar test showed a positive response in 60∑ the third grade (if it is possible to move against the gravity, but no movement is possible to go against several resistances), the remainder was 5 grade ( normal). As a result of the 5th century test, there was a sense of view and low symptoms that were not within the control scope of the 5th century.

In addition, as a result of the RoI test taken on October 10, 2013, the opinion on the escape from a signboard has been observed between the fifth and the first 1,000 pages, but according to the results of the GRI test that took effect on October 30, 2003, it was not confirmed that the GRI test conducted on October 30, 200.

Plaintiff

A was hospitalized at the Defendant Hospital on November 5, 2003, and the date of hospitalization was normal but the left-hand side did not appear to have a positive response in 45∑. As a result of the Doararararararology test, A was in Grade 3 and Grade 5, and there was a low symptoms that did not result from the Doararar test.

arrow