2. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. 1) The Defendant asserts that, even if he had accurately located in the light space at the time of the instant procedure, it is difficult to find out that he could have entered the light in the light space. Considering that there is time interval between the instant procedure and the Plaintiff’s development, etc., there is an interval of about 20 percent between the Defendant and the symptoms, it cannot be ruled out that he left the light in the light space due to any cause not known thereafter, even though he properly injected the steering agents, etc. into the light space. Thus, it cannot be concluded that the Defendant had medical malpractice to the Defendant during the instant procedure, solely on the grounds that he had affected brain and water flow into the light zone, such as lighting, etc., and thus, it cannot be concluded that there was medical malpractice to the Defendant in the instant procedure. 2) Considering that the medical records were sufficiently known to the Defendant in the first instance court’s school’s first instance court’s research and assessment process, the medical records examination results of the Plaintiff’s physical character at the Incheon University Hospital Hospital’s respective research and assessment process on the body entrustment.

A. Generally, in the instant procedure, in a case where the tent increase is accurately located in the outer space of a brush, it would be likely that the crush, etc. flows into the crush and the crush immediately after the instant procedure, even though crush et al. does not flow into the crush, it would affect the brain and the drush, and the Defendant would be out of the crush at the time of the instant procedure.