The defendant shall be innocent.

1. In the facts charged, the Defendant is a person working for the D hospital located in Mapopo-si C with a fixed appearance and medical doctor, and is a victim E (31)’s interest surgery.

At around 16:00 on December 30, 2015, the Defendant performed an operation on the part of the victim’s “the left-hand side” under the diagnosis of “the horizontal wave of the upper half of the upper half of the upper half of the body, the back of the small string, etc.” on the top of the left-hand slot.

In such a case, the Defendant had a duty of care to accurately check the medical records of the patient, such as closely examining the medical records, and prevent the surgery of any other parts than the medical records. However, the Defendant neglected to do so and failed to verify the medical records of the victim, thereby causing injury to the victim’s right-hand part of the number of days of treatment.

2. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, even though the victim was planned to perform an operation on the left slick section by undergoing the diagnosis of the horizontal wave of the upper half of the upper half of the left slick section, such as the charge, the fact that the defendant operated on the right slick section of the victim is recognized.

However, according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, ① the victim has long long been inconvenienceed on the right bridge, and actually, at the time of the instant case, the combination was confirmed to have been damaged by the “dubly damaged shape” in the upper upper frame of the right chain. ② The Defendant performed an operation on the part of the upper frame on the right chain section by using the inner diameter, ② the Defendant performed an operation on the upper right chain section of the victim’s right chain, ③ the victim’s right chain was aggravated after the Defendant’s surgery.

I can find out that there is no objective data.