The part against the defendant is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to the Jeonju District Court Panel Division.

1. As to the ground of appeal on negligence in the procedure

A. On June 12, 2008, the lower court determined that the Defendant was negligent in the instant procedure, on the ground that, in light of the following circumstances, there is sufficient probability that the instant disability could be presumed to have been caused by medical negligence by the Defendant’s damage to snow in the process of the instant procedure, on the ground that the instant disability was presumed to have been caused by the Defendant’s medical negligence, since it was sufficiently probable that the instant disability could have been presumed to have been caused by the Defendant’s injury to snow in the process of the instant procedure.

(1) On June 23, 2008, after undergoing the instant treatment, the Plaintiff appealed to the Defendant Hospital for a 111th day after receiving the instant treatment, to the lower court’s left-hand, embarrasses and aesthetic sense, and subsequently, the Defendant Hospital was receiving treatment five times in the Defendant Hospital, but the said symptoms were not improved, and received treatment for the said symptoms by going to the Defendant Hospital’s hospital.

(2) The Plaintiff, before receiving the instant treatment, did not have any senses or senses before being subjected to the instant treatment. The Plaintiff, after the instant treatment, shows the instant disability as of the date of occurrence of the symptoms.

(3) The professor sent the D Hospital Dental Amical Emphan and FO, who was in charge of the Plaintiff’s physical examination, “In the event that damage to snow pathic pathic pathic pathic pathic pathic pathic pathic pathic pathic pathic pathical pathic pathic pathic pathic pathic pathic pathic pathic pathic pathic pathic pathic pathic pathic pathic pathic pathic pathic pathic pathic pathic pathic pathical pathic pathic pathic pathic