1. The Defendant: (a) against Plaintiff B, KRW 73,474,884; (b) KRW 48,983,256, respectively; and (c) against each of the said money.

1. The occurrence and circumstances of the accident;

A. At around 08:10 on July 14, 2012, the Defendant: (a) laid down the bed of bed of bed of bed of bed of bed of bed of bed of bed of bed of bed of bed of bed of bed of bed of bed of bed of bed of bed of bed of bed of bed of bed of bed of bed of bed of bed of bed of bed of bed of bed of bed of bed of bed of bed of bed of bed of bed of bed of bed of bed of bed of bed of bed of being 3 seconds of the deceased, without additional confirmation as to abnormal increase.

B. After undergoing a bed operation from the Defendant, the Deceased died on January 12, 2016, when he/she lost awareness by suffering injuries, such as low oxygen brain damage, he/shecopic shocks, and she was treated at the hospital.

(c) A person who can be seen as an algorier reaction to a bed shall be allowed to have the body of the body of the person who shows the algorier reaction to the bed, to have the pulmone, to have the pulmone difficult, to have the pulmone, and to lose the consciousness after the blood pressure.

The Deceased had previously been punished by the Defendant, and the Deceased complained of the fear of care. D.

Plaintiff

B The husband, the plaintiff C, and D of the deceased are children of the deceased.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2, 11, Gap evidence 12-5, 6, 11, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. According to the above fact of recognition as the basis for the liability for damages, the Defendant did not take measures for safety, such as verification of symptoms, etc., or ex post facto emergency measures, in order to prevent accidents that may occur in the process without a medical license and continuously caused harm to the life and body of people. The Defendant’s mistake that caused the death of the deceased after suffering from injury to the low oxygen brain damage, etc.

Since there is a proximate causal relationship between the Defendant’s breach of duty of care and the occurrence of the instant accident, the Defendant’s tort occurred against the Plaintiffs, the inheritor of the deceased.