1. With respect to the diagnosis and treatment stated in the separate sheet against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff), the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant).

The principal lawsuit and counterclaim shall also be deemed to have been filed.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. Facts of recognition 1) The Plaintiff is the Plaintiff’s hospital E (hereinafter “Plaintiff Hospital”) in the Yansan-gu C and D, Jeonju-si.

2) On August 24, 2012, the Defendant was hospitalized in the Plaintiff Hospital to treat the injury, such as the cryp, pelle, left-hand cryp, and radioactive radioactive ray, etc. on the part of traffic accidents. As a result of the MRI shooting on August 29, 2012, it was confirmed on August 29, 2012 that the cryp escape certificate was issued between the 2-3 and 3-4, and that the cryp was accompanied by a small number of spinp cryp inverte inverte at least 4-5 times.

3) On September 4, 2012, medical doctor F employed at the Plaintiff Hospital: (a) filed an appeal with the Defendant on September 4, 2012, on the following occasions: (b) on the part of the Defendant: (c) on the part of the Defendant: (a) on the part of the Defendant, he was found to have been found next to his blood relative; and (d) on the side of his estimated signboard, the estimated signboard was seen to have been seen to have been seen as having been a blood relative; (b) on the part of the left side of the 2-3 left side of the 1-2 left left side of the 1-2 left side of the Y; and (c) on September 7, 2012, F confirmed the operation parts again; and (c) on September 7, 2012, he performed the climatic surgery on the part of the Defendant with respect to the Defendant on the part of the 2-3 left side of the 1-2 left side of the YI.

5) From August 24, 2012 to October 4, 2012, the Defendant was hospitalized at the Plaintiff Hospital for 42 days from August 24, 2012, and even after receiving two times of surgery from F, the Defendant appeared to have shown the symptoms of the escape of conical signboards Nos. 2-3, 3-4, and the left side of the Defendant. 6) The Defendant recognized the Defendant’s negligence by making a wrong determination of the operating part in the course of the surgery against the Defendant in the text of the answer for insurance review.

7 According to the result of the court's entrustment of physical examination of the medical hospital of the Kugwon University, the defendant is on the part of the defendant 2-3 in lieu of an operation on the part of the court No. 1-2.