Defendant 4,756,00 won, Plaintiff B, and C respectively. 500.

A. The Defendant is a veterinarian who operates the F Animal Hospital “F Animal Hospital” (former trade name: G Animal Hospital; hereinafter “Defendant Hospital”), and the Plaintiff (“Defendant Hospital”) is a person who requested the treatment of a return dog H, which was going together with Plaintiff B and C, a child at the Defendant Hospital (hereinafter “instant return dog”).

B. Around 14:00 on May 31, 2013, Plaintiff A: (a) requested the Defendant Hospital to perform an operation to remove approximately 7-8 cm of size on the upper side of the instant companion dog; (b) at the time, the body weight of the instant companion dog was approximately 4.9 km; (c) the Defendant immediately removed the said flag on the date when the Plaintiff requested the operation (hereinafter “instant operation”); and (d) the Defendant did not have any inspection equipment such as monitoring, or any other operation room than the diagnosis room.

3) The Defendant performed the instant surgery over 3 hours without giving an amount treatment, etc. to the return dog of this case after making an operation of 0.9 cc as a kind of the file, and without giving an amount treatment to the return dog of this case. 4) The Defendant refused to be hospitalized by suggesting that it would be desirable to secure stability in the Plaintiff A, who demanded the hospitalization of the return dog of this case immediately after the said operation, and the Defendant’s denial that the instant return dog of this case, which supported the said operation, may also go beyond the scope of an empty blood due to a large amount of dystrokes during the operation, and returned the Plaintiff A as a house with the return dog of this case.

C. After the surgery, the Plaintiff discovered that the instant return dog was not bed up and dried up to the death of the Defendant Hospital, following the surgery, and immediately explained to the Defendant on June 1, 2013, that the instant return dog was inside the Defendant hospital and was presented to the Defendant on the condition of the instant return dog.

The defendant is given vaccination to the plaintiff A during the course of locking.