(영문) 의정부지방법원 2017.02.16 2015나11718

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 의정부지방법원 2017.02.16 2015나11718

손해배상(의)

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

purport.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows: (a) adding "the part added at the trial" under Paragraph (2) below following the fifth 13th of the judgment of the court of first instance; (b) applying "it is difficult to see that the case constitutes a negligence" under Paragraph (2) above; (c) applying "it is difficult to see that the circumstances to the extent that it constitutes a negligence or that it is possible to presume the occurrence of a result caused by a doctor's negligence," and (d) adding "the part concerning the plaintiff's argument added at the trial" under Paragraph (3) below after the seventh 7th of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as the part concerning the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance; and (e) see it as it is, in accordance

2. The part of judgment added in the trial for the case of the medical practice is a field requiring highly specialized knowledge and it is very difficult for a general person, other than an expert, to clarify whether he/she has violated the duty of care in the medical process of a doctor or whether there exists causation between the violation of the duty of care and the loss of damage. Thus, when symptoms causing the result of a surgery occur to a patient during or after the surgery, it is also possible to presume that the symptoms are based on medical negligence by proving indirect facts that it is difficult to deem that there are other causes than medical negligence. However, even in such a case, it is not allowed to estimate the causal relationship between the doctor's negligence and the result of a serious serious result with circumstances where it is not probable to presume the occurrence of the result of a doctor's negligence (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Da41069, Oct. 28, 2004).

3. Determination as to the Plaintiff’s assertion added at the Plaintiff’s trial (hereinafter “3) and the injury to two trauma patients.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

참조판례

-대법원 2015. 1. 29. 선고 2012다41069 판결

유사 판례

-부산지방법원 2016.12.02 2016나45745

-서울서부지방법원 2018.11.23 2018나31600

-대법원 2015.07.09 2013다72596

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.02.09 2017나3665

-부산지방법원 2016.12.15 2016나45776