1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The defendant is a medical corporation that has a Seoul Asan Hospital under its jurisdiction, and the plaintiff is a patient who has undergone a workplace cancer operation from the non-party B belonging to the Seoul Asan Hospital.

B. The Plaintiff was hospitalized in the Defendant Hospital from September 2, 2012 to May 5 of the same month while receiving treatment from another hospital due to symptoms, such as dials, and was diagnosed as a result of the Plaintiff’s diagnosis of workplace cancer. On November 30, 2012, the Plaintiff received from Nonparty B an electric dynasium and dynasium dynasium using robots.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant surgery”). C.

After the operation, the plaintiff could not perform urology, and caused artificial urology by inserting urology into the urgical urgical urgical urgical urgical urgical urgical urgical urgical urgical urgical urgical urgical urgical urgical urgical urgicals.

[Reasons for Recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 12, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 16, the result of the entrustment of medical records to a high-level university hospital and a Busan university hospital, the result of the entrustment of physical examinations to a high-level university hospital, the purport of the entire pleadings.

2. The plaintiff's assertion: (a) although the non-party B, who collected the surgery of this case, had a duty of care to remove only cancer while removing the cancer in his work, he did not cut the ne and did not complete loss of her sexual function and urine urology due to negligence that cuted and damaged the relevant surrounding parts, such as the plaintiff's sexual organs and urine, and (b) the non-party B, after the surgery, complained of not less than her sexual function and urology, did not take such measures despite the possibility that the plaintiff's symptoms were cut, not the symptoms of the vegeical urine urology, but had taken measures to connect the vegetable urine urology before the elapse of six months; and (c) the defendant caused urology or urology by the surgery of this case.