The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the grounds of appeal Nos. 1 and 2, the lower court, based on its stated reasoning, determined that it is difficult to recognize Defendant D’s failure to perform the duty of care for inserting, manipulating, etc. of the internal landscape apparatus at the time of the internal landscape inspection on June 23, 2012 on the deceased at G Hospital located in Yangcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “the deceased”).

Examining the record in light of the relevant legal principles, the above determination by the court below is just, and contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors by misapprehending the burden of proof of causation and the legal principles on medical malpractice, or failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations

2. Of the grounds of appeal No. 3, as to the assertion of misapprehension of the legal principle as to negligence related to early review after home-resistant review

A. A physician has 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 nature of the duties of managing the patient’s life, body, and health, and such duty of care is determined based on the level of medical practice performed in the clinical medical field, such as medical institutions, at the time of performing the medical practice. Since the level of medical care is generally known and recognized at the time of the medical practice, considering the environment and conditions of the medical practice, characteristics of the medical practice, etc., it should be identified at a normative level in light of the medical environment, conditions, and the characteristics of the medical practice. Furthermore, the diagnosis is the starting point of the clinical medicine that determines the disease and specifies the type, character, and degree of progress of the diagnosis, and thus, it is important to determine whether there is negligence in the diagnosis. Thus, the complete clinical diagnosis is conducted in that process.