1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Basic facts

A. On October 4, 201, the Plaintiff received 1,600,000 won for the surgery from the Defendant working in a sexual surgery from the Defendant working in a sexual surgery, after having been performing a both-round sexual surgery (tentatively called irreparation surgery), the niver sexual surgery, and the l,60,000 won for the external surgery.

However, even after the above surgery, as the internal pain continued for a considerable period of time, the defendant received a second operation to correct each of the above surgery from the defendant on October 29, 201.

B. After the instant secondary surgery, the Plaintiff continued to perform the pain of the mouth. On March 29, 2012, the Plaintiff received treatment of the eyebrow (a symptoms that may stimulate the eyebrow from each other) without any internal autopsy in the DNA department with a detailed eye-resistant autopsy (it may occur in a state where the eyebrow is opened to the inner eye, and there may be a small level of climatic body, etc., or a small level of climatic body, etc., or a small range of climatic body, etc.). On December 20, 2012, the Plaintiff was treated with climatic climatics of the inner eyebrow (a symptoms that may stimulate the eyebrow from each eye or climatic body), anti-sive malmosis (a symptoms that may cause damage to the eyebane).

C. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff appealed to the above hospital after the Defendant retired from C, and received medical treatment from the doctor E working at the above hospital. At the time of the above procedure, E discovered wing type from the Plaintiff’s aftermathic surgery, removed wing type, and checked part of the two confluences that overlap.

As the Plaintiff did not alleviate the pain and the inner eyebrow, etc. even after the above procedure, on April 4, 2013, the Plaintiff received a correction of the 2nd eye sewage on both sides from the F sexual surgery, and the 8,500,000 won was paid for the surgery.

E. The plaintiff is above D.

A. This re-operation as described in paragraph A.

G at the time of the operation described in paragraph C, and H and I recommended to undergo the procedure in the above sexual surgery.