1. The Defendant’s KRW 10,829,050 per annum against each of the Plaintiffs and 5% per annum from February 7, 2018 to October 16, 2020.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Nonparty F (hereinafter “the deceased”) died as a Gborn female on February 7, 2018, at the age of 82 years, and the Plaintiffs are the deceased’s children.

B. On December 27, 2017, the Deceased was diagnosed to be the left-hand top-down in the emergency room of H Hospital operated by the Defendant (hereinafter “Defendant Hospital”).

C. As a result of the Defendant hospital’s dental surgery, the Defendant hospital’s medical team diagnosed that the deceased was in the state of “the heart heart, the heart test, the chest X-ray test,” the deceased diagnosed that the deceased was in the state of “the crypology cryposis cryposis cryposis, the crypium crypium crypium crypium, the crypium crypium crypium crypium, the serious cryprypium crypium, etc. of the cryprypium, etc.

On December 27, 2017, the Deceased was carried out at the Defendant Hospital’s department outside of the hospital and the medical staff, with a view to the anti-pact of the mission, which is an anti-pact of the deceased (hereinafter “instant surgery”).

E. As a result of blood examination conducted on January 25, 2018 after the operation, the Deceased confirmed that the NT-proproprop value was 1268 pg/ml.

F. On February 7, 2018, the Deceased died due to the heart paralysis around 17:30 on February 7, 2018, and the direct death on the death report is “the heart.”

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap's 1 through 4, the purport of whole pleadings

2. Summary of the plaintiffs' claims

A. On December 27, 2017, the medical personnel at Defendant Hospital confirmed the heart disease of the Deceased before performing the instant surgery to the Deceased. As such, once conducting the instant surgery, the medical personnel neglected the instant surgery and neglected to perform the instant duty of care by correcting the heart condition of the Deceased and preventing the outbreak of a merger, etc., even though he/she had a duty of care to prevent the occurrence of a merger, etc. by correcting the condition of the Deceased.

B. The medical staff of the Defendant Hospital predicted that the occurrence of a complication, such as a acute heart failure, etc. after the instant surgery, had a duty of care to avoid the deceased’s death by performing treatment following the aggravation of the heart, such as an ultra-frequency test, and thus, performing such a duty.