2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

A. On December 29, 2014, the deceased F (hereinafter “the deceased”) was transferred to G Hospital operated by Defendant E, because it was sick on the right chest due to an accident that goes beyond the stairs located in the house, around 07:58.

B. At the time, the Defendant D, a doctor of G Hospital, who treated the Deceased, conducted X photographing to the Deceased, issued a diagnosis that requires two weeks of drug prices, physical therapy, and stability costs due to the plebing of the plebrative presponse, and that there is a need for a re-examination when discovering disease and non-exploitation evidence, and prescribed three days of a diagnosis.

C. On December 31, 2014, around 19:13, 2014, the Deceased returned to Hawon located in Yangcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, but she sought the opinion of the doctor to transfer to Ha, and she returned to the emergency room at around 21:48.

At the time of the emergency room, the deceased showed the right plehoric shock symptoms related to the trauma at the time of the emergency room, and the medical personnel at the I Hospital performed the crypization procedure to the deceased and hospitalized into the pulmonary and serious patient room.

Since then, adult pulmonary Reculsis was in progress to the deceased, and the Ecromothic pulmonary Reculsis and continuous new replacement method was implemented, but the pulmonary dynasium of the deceased was not improved, and the dynasium of the deceased was aggravated in spite of the 7-time crypopic surgery, resulting in the death on January 18, 2018.

''

E. The deceased’s heir is the Plaintiff A, B, and C, who is the spouse.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff asserted that the deceased suffered a cage cage cages in excess of lages at the time of the death, and caused the damage to the right-hand end of the deceased, and the Defendant D did not know this even even after X-ray was taken, and caused the deceased to lose the opportunity to receive treatment, such as a timely operation, by simply diagnosing the deceased as a spage spage, and Defendant E as the user of Defendant D.