1. The plaintiffs' claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Basic Facts

Plaintiff

C (F) From July 1, 2015, the five weeks of pregnancy, G hospital operated by Defendant D (hereinafter “Defendant hospital”) was examined in advance, and Defendant E was the doctor of the above Plaintiff.

Plaintiff

C around February 28, 2016, around 21:00, the Defendant Hospital commenced only natural subdivisions (from 4-5 cm up to 4-5 cm up at the time of the opening of the ancient landscape), and on February 29, 2016, two deliverys began due to the opening of the GG GG by the GG GG in its entirety.

On February 29, 2016, the medical personnel of the Defendant Hospital decided to conduct the king operation at around 11:20, and transferred the Plaintiff C to the operating room at around 11:50 on the same day, and on the same day, the deceased A (hereinafter “the deceased”) was born at around 12:07 (3.5km at the time).

The deceased children transferred to H hospital immediately after childbirth and received treatment after the diagnosis of the symptoms of childbirth, low-carbon typhism, etc. (hereinafter “in this case’s bad results”), and died on October 19, 2017 during the litigation of this case.

Accordingly, the plaintiff B and C, who is the parent of the deceased child, took over the status of the lawsuit.

【In the absence of any dispute over the grounds for recognition, Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 5 and 8, the Seoul National University Hospital head of this court, and the Chief of the Korea Medical Dispute Mediation and Arbitration Agency, the outcome of each request for appraisal of the medical records by the plaintiffs for the examination of the whole purport of the pleadings, and the negligence in this part of the defendant hospital's medical personnel in the claim that the examination of the whole purport of the arguments was set at

① The Plaintiff C did not closely observe the first-time condition of the delivery by 30 minutes.

② At the time of delivery, a manager neglected to monitor even though the beer of the fetus fells, such as falling short of the beer of the fetus, on a multiple occasions.

③ On February 29, 2016, from around 08:00 to 09:30, a gold-gu studio was administered in a gold-gu studio balanced treatment, and the progress was not sufficiently examined.

④ On February 29, 2016, at around 10:15, the Plaintiff C’s sloping is found to be protruding, but the sloping balance is immediately balanced.