Based on the results of the biopsy, the doctor who removed a part of the lung without the patient's consent and the hospital they belonged to were charged a large amount of compensation.



The first division of the Supreme Court (Chief Justice Kim Sun-sun) announced today (28th) that it has confirmed the original judgment in favor of part of the plaintiff in the appeal trial for damages filed by patient A against Seoul St. Mary's Hospital and his doctor B.



In June 2016, Mr. A consented to a lung biopsy at Seoul St. Mary's Hospital and underwent general anesthesia.



Doctor B determined that the cause of the symptoms of A was 'inflammation without malignant tumor cells' during the biopsy process.



At the same time, the function of a part of the lung was reduced due to chronic inflammation, making it difficult to recover, so that part was removed without the patient's consent.



However, the final biopsy result was found to be 'tuberculosis', and Mr. A filed a lawsuit for damages against Mr. B and the hospital saying that there was no need to remove the lungs.



The first trial judged that Mr. A's consent to the biopsy was to identify the exact causative organism, not resection.



He also pointed out that Mr. A would not have agreed to the operation to remove the lungs because he showed a very sensitive reaction to the biopsy to remove the lung tissue.



At the same time, Mr. B and the hospital said that there was no evidence that Mr. B and the hospital had explained about the resection to Mr. A or that Mr. A had consented to the operation, and both B and the hospital decided to compensate Mr. A about 1.4 billion won.



The second instance maintained the same judgment as the first instance, but the compensation amount was lowered to 1.1 billion won by partially adjusting the standard for calculating damages such as the monthly income of Mr. A.



Plaintiff and defendant appealed separately, but the Supreme Court dismissed both appeals.