1. The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to each of the Plaintiffs for KRW 7,00,000 and the Defendants’ amounting thereto from November 19, 2014 to April 26, 2017.

I. The relevant legal principles have a duty of care to take the best measures required to prevent risks depending on the patient’s specific symptoms or circumstances in light of the patient’s nature of duties to manage the patient’s life and body, and such duty of care is based on the level of medical practice performed in the clinical medical field, such as a medical institution at the time of the medical practice. Since the level of medical care refers to the so-called medical awareness generally known and recognized at the time of the medical practice, considering the environment and conditions of the medical practice, the unique characteristics of the medical practice, etc., the normative level should be identified. Furthermore, diagnosis is an important medical practice that is selected by the Medical Treatment Act, including identifying whether the disease is disease or not, depending on the outcome of the diagnosis, the diagnosis’s identification of the type, character, and degree of progress, and thus, it is an important medical practice that is selected by the Medical Treatment Act. Thus, even if it is impossible to conduct the complete clinical diagnosis without fault in the process, it should be determined within the level of diagnosis required by the doctor as a professional in the clinical medical field, even if it is impossible.

(2) The following facts are the following: (a) the progress of the case and the fact following the progress of the case are the following: (b) Supreme Court Decision 2003Da33875 Decided April 9, 2004; and (c) Supreme Court Decision 2014Da233190 Decided July 9, 2015, etc.; and (d) the purport of the entire pleadings, other than macro-made evidence.

1. Defendant E is the trade name of “G hospital” (hereinafter “Defendant hospital”).