All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. When a doctor provides medical services, such as diagnosis, medical treatment, etc., he/she has a duty of care to take the best measures required to prevent any danger depending on the patient's specific symptoms or circumstances, considering the nature of the service

Such a duty of care of a doctor shall be based on the level of medical practice performed in the field of clinical medicine, such as a medical institution, at the time of performing a medical act. The level of medical care refers to the so-called medical common sense known to and known to a normal doctor at the time of performing a medical act. As such, the normative level should be determined by considering the environment and conditions of medical treatment

(See Supreme Court Decision 98Da45379, 45386 Decided March 26, 199, and Supreme Court Decision 2009Da45146 Decided November 10, 201, etc.). In addition, in a case where the injured party proves in a claim for damages arising from a breach of duty of care due to a violation of a medical practice that the injured party’s act of medical negligence based on the ordinary common sense was low in the course of a series of medical practice and that the result could not have any other cause than a series of medical practices, the causal link between the medical negligence and the result may be presumed.

(See Supreme Court Decision 93Da52402 Decided February 10, 1995, and Supreme Court Decision 2009Da82275 Decided January 27, 2012, etc.). Meanwhile, the court determines whether the assertion is true in accordance with logical and empirical rules based on the ideology of social justice and equity by free evaluation of evidence, taking into account the purport of the entire pleadings and the result of the examination of evidence (Article 202 of the Civil Procedure Act). The fact that the lower court’s judgment did not exceed the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence and thus duly confirmed by the court of final appeal is binding on the court of final

(Article 432 of the same Act). 2. The lower court determined to the following purport on the grounds as stated in its reasoning.

January 1, 2010, either before 18:07