1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff was hospitalized in Cmedical Center under Cmedical Service name from September 4, 2007 to October 18, 2007.

(hereinafter referred to as 'the instant hospitalization'). (b)

In around 2007, the defendant served as a public health doctor at Cmedical Center, and decided the hospitalization of the plaintiff in this case with the consent of D, the father of the plaintiff, and E, the plaintiff.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, C Medical Center's inquiry result, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion as to the cause of the claim was that the Defendant, a mental doctor, was unable to force the Plaintiff to be hospitalized in the mental hospital and discharge the Plaintiff from the hospital on the sole basis of the written consent of the Plaintiff’s family members.

As a result, the Plaintiff lost the opportunity to become a professor in the United States, and the Plaintiff could not receive USD 50,000 from the annual salary that would have been received if the Plaintiff had been a professor.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff the annual salary of 450,000,000 won (=$50,000 x 9 years) and damages for delay, which is part of the damages for the plaintiff.

3. Determination

A. According to Article 24(1) of the former Mental Health Act (amended by Act No. 8852 of Feb. 29, 2008), the director of a mental medical institution may, upon the consent of the legal guardian of a mentally ill person, hospitalization of the mentally ill person in question only when the diagnosis requires hospitalization by a psychiatrist. In such case, the director of the mental medical institution shall obtain a written consent of hospitalization and a document verifying that the legal guardian is the legal guardian as prescribed by Ordinance of the Ministry of Health and Welfare.

B. According to the above evidence, the plaintiff's father D, the plaintiff's father, and E at the time of the hospitalization of this case, and the plaintiff can be recognized as having received medical treatment even before the hospitalization of this case. At the time, the defendant, as a psychiatrist, determined hospitalization according to reasonable diagnosis based on medical knowledge and legitimate procedures.