1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

Purport of claim and appeal

1.

1. The reasons why this Court should state this part of the basic facts are as follows. The plaintiff C shall state the "Plaintiff C" in Part II of the judgment of the court of first instance as "the plaintiff C", and the defendant shall accept it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, except for deletion of "the result of the commission of delivery of each document to the Busan District Court and the Ulsan District Prosecutors' Office" in Part V, 17.

2. The parties' assertion

A. Although the Defendants could have easily predicted or avoided that the result of physical damage caused by brain infection would have occurred to the Plaintiff C, the Defendants did not immediately diagnose the Plaintiff C only with a new fluor, and did not take any particular measures. Accordingly, the Plaintiff C suffered bodily damage caused by the recognition and language function due to brain infection after the thale, so the damage claim in this case constitutes “damage claim caused by a tort that causes damage to another person’s life or body by gross negligence” under Article 566 subparag. 4 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act, as stated in Article 566 subparag. 4 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act.

B. The initial symptoms of the Defendants’ brain infection and cerebral mathitis are similar to a reduction of the weather, and it is difficult to distinguish them, and even at the second and third medical institutions all of the Plaintiff C, the Defendants did not immediately diagnose them as brain infection. The Defendants recommended the Plaintiff C to transfer to the Busan University Hospital on May 5, 2010, when the symptoms suspected of having the Plaintiff C’s cerebral mathy were revealed, but the symptoms of the Plaintiff’s cerebral mathy increase further by delayed treatment. Therefore, it is difficult to deem that the Defendants diagnosed or did not doubt the Plaintiff C’s cerebral mathy as brain infection, and there was a gross negligence in medical care for the Defendants.

3. Determination

A. The debtor is serious.