The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

1. Examining the grounds of appeal Nos. 1 and 2 in light of the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court was justifiable to have determined that the Defendant failed to fulfill its duty to explain required in the instant procedure on the grounds stated in its reasoning.

In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors by misapprehending the legal principles on the duty to explain or by exceeding the bounds of free evaluation of evidence.

2. Examining the ground of appeal No. 3 in light of the relevant legal principles and records, the court below is justified in holding that there is a proximate causal relationship between the implementation of the instant procedure due to the Defendant’s violation of the duty to explain and the symptoms experienced by the Plaintiffs after the instant procedure, as well as the Plaintiffs’ claim for consolation money and the claim for medical expenses.

Contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there is no error of law by misapprehending the legal principles on the scope of damages.

3. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.