1. The judgment of the first instance court, including the claims expanded and reduced in this court, shall be modified as follows:

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, which cited this case, is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the dismissal of a part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of

In addition, the part of the judgment of the court of first instance each "this court" shall be deemed to be "the first instance court". The part of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be deemed to be the 6th 6th, 6th 10, 12 9th , 15 through 16th .

Part 12 of the judgment of the court of first instance [based grounds for recognition] shall be added to the column of the first instance judgment "each description of evidence A 15 through 19."

The 12th of the first instance judgment “Defendant” in the 14th of the 12th judgment is “Defendants,” and the 17 to 18th of the 18th judgment is “Defendants,” respectively.

The 12th to 13th of the first instance judgment are as follows.

1) Hashel treatment costs: 168,062,560 won (i.e., K Hospital 18,973,320 won, K Hospital 6,256,930 won L Hospital 28,770,260 won, M Hospital 28,484,60 won, N Hospital 20,959,680 won, N Hospital 6,012,530 won, P Hospital 6,940,050 won, Q Hospital 668,900 won, Q Hospital 660,90 won, and 14,326,260 won, and 350 won, and 6,70,370 won, and 6,70,370 won, and 6,719,719, and 205, the Plaintiff’s general hospital was not subject to additional causal relation with the disease’s disease’s disease’s actual expenses.