Surgeon Who Cut Patient's Genitals During Penis Enlargement Surgery Sentenced to Fine

A urologist was sentenced to a fine after cutting a patient's genitals during a penis enlargement surgery.

According to the legal community on the 20th, Choi Ji-yeon, a judge at the Seoul Central District Court, sentenced urologist A to a fine of 7 million won on charges of causing injury due to professional negligence.

A was charged with injuring B, a man in his 30s, during the penis enlargement surgery on May 30, 2020, by cutting off his genitals.

B revealed during the pre-surgery consultation that he had already undergone two penis enlargement surgeries. In response, A explained that there could be severe adhesion between the penile corpora and the existing prosthesis, making dissection difficult and increasing the risk of significant bleeding, as well as the possibility of needing to remove the prosthesis again.

Judgment on Medical Negligence and Duty to Explain

However, the court determined that A had failed to fulfill the duty to explain the significant risks involved. It was found that A did not adequately explain the risks of damage to the penile corpora and urethral corpora during the hemostasis and dissection process in cases of severe adhesion, which could lead to erectile dysfunction or urinary disorders.

A did not fulfill the duty to explain the significant risks

During the actual surgery, when bleeding occurred and damage to the penile corpora and urethra was suspected, A stopped the surgery and transferred B to another hospital while applying gauze for hemostasis.

At the hospital to which B was transferred, he was diagnosed with a transverse cut in 100% of the penile corpora and 95% of the urethral corpora. B underwent immediate surgery to repair the damage; however, he was left with aftereffects such as urinary disorders and erectile dysfunction.

The court stated, "A could have taken measures to prevent serious complications by being cautious not to cause damage, and if significant damage was confirmed, he could have stopped the dissection and performed suturing." It was concluded that A caused the injuries by attempting dissection forcefully under severe adhesion with the existing prosthesis.

Furthermore, the court explained, "Although the surgical consent form signed by B stated that unpredictable and unavoidable complications could occur depending on the patient's condition, as a layperson, it would be difficult for the victim to anticipate such serious complications based solely on A's explanations."

Regarding sentencing, the court noted, "B has suffered considerable physical and mental pain for an extended period following the surgery and has not received a genuine apology from A, thus seeking a heavy punishment."

However, it also took into account that "considering the nature of the surgery and the anatomical structure of the surgical site, there are mitigating circumstances," and acknowledged that "A made efforts to prevent the expansion of damage by directly transferring B to a higher-level hospital after the surgery, and has covered hospital costs as well as the expenses for surgery and hospitalization at the higher-level hospital."

Meanwhile, in the civil case related to this incident, the Seoul Eastern District Court ruled in January last year that A must compensate B a total of approximately 24.63 million won, including 60% of B's medical expenses (4.63 million won) and 20 million won in damages, and A's appeal is currently undergoing a second trial.

Image source: Reference photos to aid understanding of the article / gettyimagesbank