1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

Purport of claim and appeal

1.

1. The reasons for the court's explanation concerning this case are as follows: "No" No. 6 pages 1 of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be added to "No. 6 pages 1 of the judgment of the court of first instance," and the following judgments are added to "No. 6 pages 1 of the judgment of the court of first instance," and Triton injection, which the Defendants are using in the instant procedure, is likely to cause side effects and risks that may cause the administration of the part-to-pmon, which are similar to the part-pmonic chemical of the court of first instance, and where the Defendants voluntarily asserted that the procedure to explain the part-to-pmon to the ordinary patient was followed by an oral explanation is likely to cause adverse results to the patient being performed," and the following judgments are added to the defendants' assertion in the court of first instance, and the reasons for the judgment of first instance to 6 Do 11 through 15 of the judgment of the court of first instance [No. 2.2.3 of the judgment of the court of first instance] as follows.

[Supplementary part] The defendant asserts to the effect that "the plaintiff's husband received the same treatment as that of this case for a long time as the plaintiff's husband was a patient with multiple flachisium, and the plaintiff also served as a dental sanitarian, and therefore, the plaintiff was well aware of the procedure of this case, the plaintiff was already under a long period of physical treatment at another hospital, but there was no symptoms, and in such a case there was no symptoms, the plaintiff accepted it even if the plaintiff explained the side effects, etc. of the procedure of this case from the defendant C at the time of the procedure of this case, and therefore, the plaintiff accepted it. Thus, the plaintiff's constructive consent was recognized, and thus, the plaintiff did not claim damages against the defendants.

However, the above circumstance alleged by the Defendants is presumed to have consented to the instant procedure.