At 09:00 on 6 Aug 2026 at Nonthaburi Provincial Court, a case was scheduled for judgment between Ms. Lapatsanan Phanmanithanakorn , or Tom Rachaneekorn Phanman a famous actress, who filed a lawsuit against Ms. Phitsaphan Srichaiyan (known as Pin Lelak),
an executive of Lelak Hospital and four others, regarding facial cosmetic surgery damages totaling 50 million baht. The court scheduled the verdict for Thursday, 6 August 2026 at 09:00. Previously, on 12 May 2026, the hearing was postponed as Tom Rachaneekorn wished to submit additional documents.
The lower court ruled that defendant 4 must pay damages totaling about 7.7 million baht, with defendant 1 (the hospital) jointly liable. The damages include medical and corrective surgery costs of about 2.9 million baht, lost earnings of about 1.8 million baht, and future damages of about 3 million baht.
After the verdict, Pin Lelak and her legal team, including lawyer Kaew, Dr. Monchai Jongkairattanakul, and lawyer Krit Samutkhota, spoke to the media about the case.
How did the court rule today?
Pin said, "The court ordered the hospital to pay Tom. Honestly, I lost the case."
What did the court base its decision on to rule this way?
The lawyer explained, "The court ordered defendant 4 to pay about 7.7 million baht, with defendant 1, the hospital, jointly responsible. Pin, as defendant 2, and another director, defendant 3, were acquitted. That is the summary of the verdict."
From a legal perspective, why did we lose the case?
The lawyer said, "There were several issues the court did not consider. We intend to appeal because some evidence we presented was not reviewed. We believe some points should be raised in the appeal."
What does the 7.7 million baht cover?
The lawyer said, "It includes medical expenses and corrective surgery of about 2.9 million baht, lost income of 1.8 million baht, and future damages of 3 million baht, totaling 7.7 million."
Pin said, "I'm not upset about paying 7.7 million baht. What saddens me is I never thought the judgment would come out like this. Our intentions were good; the doctors were sincere. Medical evidence, including an independent doctor and clear CT scans, showed no nerve damage or sensory problems causing facial numbness or deformity."
She continued, "We saw she lived normally, could sing, eat solid and chewy food. I was shocked hearing the verdict. At first, I thought they were just reviewing, but this was the actual judgment. I'm not refusing to accept it, but I'm very surprised."
So you were quite confident before coming here that you wouldn't lose?
Pin said, "I was over 90% confident because all medical evidence showed no nerve impact. The CT scan proved it clearly. I've worked long in aesthetics and don't bias myself. The evidence and independent medical experts made me confident."
Did the plaintiff's new evidence submitted earlier influence the ruling?
The lawyer said, "The court considers all documents. It did affect the judgment. We must appeal because that evidence wasn't cross-examined in court as it was submitted later."
What was the late-submitted evidence about?
The lawyer said, "I'll need to review details because it was submitted by the plaintiff as part of closing statements, which I wasn't aware of. The court did consider it."
Pin said, "I spoke with the case doctor, defendant 4, who was shocked we lost. He said the last evidence submitted was likely what the court considered, even though we had no chance to cross-examine as time ran out after a three-month postponement."
She added, "The judgment should have been made then, but it was delayed. When I told the case doctor he didn't attend the hearing, he said the court saw the importance of that evidence and included it without our opportunity to contest."
Can this be seen as a disadvantage to us?
The lawyer responded, "Let's not question the court's discretion. We haven't received the full judgment. We accept the decision and will use our right to appeal."
You mentioned some issues the court didn't consider?
The lawyer said, "As I said, we need the full judgment. I only heard parts; the court read the end, not all. This is a preliminary response."
Pin said, "At first, I thought the court was just reviewing, not deciding. We didn't think we did anything wrong. After the verdict, I wondered if I was dreaming because we accept responsibility when at fault and are willing to pay. But in this case, medical experts in the field see no harmful effects."
Why did Pin break down in tears?
Pin said, "I didn't cry out of weakness or refusal to accept the verdict, but out of sadness and shock. I wanted to smile and fight, but I couldn't. We had good intentions; the doctor worked sincerely."
She continued, "If she was unhappy with the jaw surgery ruled by the court, and truly dissatisfied, she wouldn't have returned for subsequent facial corrections after three months. Our medical team sincerely aimed to beautify and fix issues from previous attempts."
Pin added, "We don't dwell on beauty 20-30 years ago but focus on the pre-correction problem. We never saw deformities requiring treatment abroad."
She said, "Regarding the team, I initially didn't think she sought money because I'm optimistic. But later, I realized she did want money and wasn't thinking about goodwill or what we did for her. She thought she could do anything because she's a movie star, damaging our reputation. We've suffered greatly since this issue began."
Pin noted, "Tom sued for 50 million baht but the court awarded only 7 million. Does the court base this on actual damages?"
The lawyer replied, "Not exactly. The court considered some submitted documents. We will appeal this as we don't fully agree."
What are the next steps?
The lawyer said, "We'll review the documents regarding damages the court awarded. Some plaintiff claims weren't proven. We'll exercise our right to appeal within 30 days and may request a suspension. We'll review documents further."
Are you ready to fight in the appeal?
Pin said, "If the case proceeds like this, yes, we will fight. I believe many key issues deserve justice but may not have been fully considered."
You mentioned damages over 100 million baht?
Pin said, "The hospital's real damages exceed 100 million baht. I've run this business, opened the hospital 15 years ago and aesthetic clinics for over 10 years. I borrowed 200-300 million baht initially and paid off debts long ago."
She continued, "During this crisis with Tom, customers hesitated despite acknowledging Lelak made her beautiful. There are many options, so they stopped coming. I still owe about 200 million baht. This shows clear financial harm."
What would you like to say to her?
Pin said, "I want to say that my intentions were good. People are different; when you give good things, some reciprocate, some don't. But don't harm or cause suffering. I support over 300 staff, excluding doctors. I've never cut pay or staff and took loans to support them."
She added, "One must consider karma and consequences. Our intentions, and the doctors', were very good—not because she's a star but as a client to be made beautiful. I'd also say to Tom and others: after all this, don't harm or torment her unnecessarily since no real harm occurred."
Pin expressed deep concern that this ruling might cause people to believe Lelak is genuinely at fault and damage its reputation.
Does this lower court ruling significantly shake the hospital's reputation?
Pin admitted, "I was shocked and didn't think we'd lose. I worry that customers and the public will see us as negligent."
She emphasized, "I choose skilled plastic surgeons to make people beautiful. The doctor who operated on this case was sincere and highly experienced in facial work in Thailand. He has a good heart but is still being treated unfairly."
How confident are you about overturning the verdict on appeal?
Pin said, "I'm confident that if the court truly considers the medical evidence, especially CT scans showing no nerve or tooth root impact, and if independent expert doctors join, we have a good chance to win on appeal with additional evidence."
The lawyer said, "We are fully committed to this case. We'll respect the court's process and use our rights to appeal, including further appeals if necessary."
What issues will you emphasize in the appeal?
The lawyer explained, "It's a defense between two medical expert groups. Defendant 4 presented an independent doctor and scientific evidence. The burden is on defendant 4 to appeal. We shouldn't pre-judge details until we receive the judgment."
Can Pin counter-sue at this stage?
The lawyer said, "Yes, Pin has the right to sue for defamation if she feels her reputation was harmed."
Does Pin intend to file a countersuit now?
Pin said, "We believed we wouldn't lose and have discussed with the team that we might countersue due to real damages. We did no harm and had good intentions."
Click to read more
Entertainment NewsMore