1. The Plaintiff’s review of the Medical Fee Dispute Resolution Council dated February 20, 2014 against the Defendant is based on the review of the Medical Fee Dispute Resolution Council.

1. The Plaintiff, as a medical corporation operating the same-sex hospital (hereinafter “Plaintiff hospital”), filed a claim for the payment of insurance proceeds against the Defendant, treating A, who is a traffic accident patient. As a result of the Defendant’s review by the Medical Fee Dispute Resolution Council (hereinafter “Council”) which raised an objection, the following was determined on February 20, 2014.

On July 5, 2013, KRW 2,112,090, which was performed without a certificate of adaptation to the acute operation related to the claim of KRW 4,006,920, is KRW 1,894,830.

Of KRW 3,205,540 already paid by the Defendant on August 2, 2013, KRW 1,310,710 exceeding the aforementioned reasonable medical expenses shall be returned to the Defendant by the Plaintiff, and there is no obligation to pay KRW 801,380 for additional payments by the Plaintiff.

B. In relation to the operation under the preceding paragraph related to the claim of KRW 4,300,000 on July 30, 2013, the Plaintiff shall return to the Defendant, as materials for which A paid directly to the Plaintiff and received as insurance money, and which the Plaintiff shall return to the Defendant.

[Ground for Recognition: Unsatisfy Facts, Gap 3, 4]

2. Scope of the Plaintiff’s legitimate right to claim medical expenses

A. The facts of recognition 1) A, as a female under the age of 27 at the time of the accident, experienced a sudden accident on June 21, 2013, and complained of a booming pain accompanied by the right low-speed symptoms, and was inside the emergency room of the Plaintiff hospital. The Plaintiff hospital diagnosed A with the escape certificate of a protruding signboard between 5-6 and June 26, 2013. However, according to A’s MRI image taken the following day of the accident, it was difficult to view that the symptoms of the escape certificate of a protruding signboard between 5-6 and 5-6 in light of the fact that there was a symptoms of the escape certificate of a protruding signboard, but it was difficult to view that it was serious as it was not clear whether it was caused by acute trauma, because it was not caused by the damage to the organization of annual installments.

3 The preservation treatment of these conical signboards shall be given to escape symptoms.