beta
Text
1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiffs are the children of the deceased F (Girs women; hereinafter “the deceased”). The Defendant is an insurer who has concluded a business liability insurance contract with the second floor J of the IE Kimpo-si operated by H (hereinafter “the instant medical care center”).
B. From April 1, 2012, the Deceased complained of a bridge pain around 11:00 on June 12, 2013 while hospitalized in the instant medical care center from around April 1, 2012, and transferred it to the L Hospital located in K in Kimpo-si. The Deceased was diagnosed by the said hospital as a large dysium, severe pelrassis, etc.
At the time, the physician in charge of the above hospital explained to the deceased's family members that "it is necessary to perform an operation to cure the frame of the bomb, but it is necessary to conduct internal diagnosis and treatment before the operation due to the deceased's old age, dementia, etc. Even if the operation is performed, the aggregate of the bombs can not be easily performed, and the life can be affected by various internal and internal mergers due to old age. In addition, the death may be caused by rapid aggravation of the overall condition before and after the operation, and in the case of the bomb, it may be dead during the operation."
Therefore, the family members of the deceased refused to recommend the operation of the above hospital because they were unable to check the operation due to their old age.
C. On June 13, 2013, the Deceased transferred to the Nvalvalescent Hospital located in the Young-si, Young-si M, and the same year during which the said hospital was hospitalized.
8.18.Honia diagnosed as Neumonia and transferred to a middle-patient's room, for the same year;
8. On 26. 17:05, at around 17:05, the death of a deceased person with the primary cause of death.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1, Gap evidence 2-1, 3, Gap evidence 3, 5, Eul evidence 1 through 10, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The summary of the plaintiffs' assertion was caused by the O, a caregiver belonging to the medical center of this case, by falling the deceased on the floor while the deceased was moved from the wheelchairs to the bed.
Therefore, this.