1. The Defendant’s KRW 35,018,558 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from September 5, 2015 to November 30, 2017.

1. Basic facts

A. The status of the parties is that the Defendant is an intention to operate Ewons (hereinafter “Defendant hospital”) under the 401 Silsan City D Building, and the Plaintiff is a patient who has been administered at the Defendant hospital.

B. At around 16:20 on August 23, 2012, the Plaintiff’s internal procedure, the Defendant’s procedure, and the instant accident occurred (i) applied the Defendant’s hospital on the ground of mountain type (e.g., g., g., g., g., g., g., g., g., g., g., g., g., g., g., g., g., g., g., g., g., g., g., g., g., g., g., g.,

(hereinafter “instant accident”). C.

After the treatment process and the plaintiff's present condition 1), the plaintiff argued that the blood transfusion has continuously occurred in the right eye immediately after the treatment, and that the defendant again conducted a medical examination for the right eye of the plaintiff, and confirmed that there has been any such a heat, and then conducted a medical treatment for inserting liquid drugs and Contactren by inserting liquid drugs and Contactrens. 2) At present, the plaintiff's opinion on the codinivity is observed at the center of the right eye 2.25m in length at the center of the right eye of the plaintiff's friendship, and 1.75 d observer is measured.

On March 23, 2012, in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, the Plaintiff performed a mass surgery in the Seocho-gu Fanche Division, and currently, the maximum correctional vision in the left is 1.0, but the maximum correctional vision in the left is 0.5, and the maximum correctional vision in the left turn has been deteriorated by 0.5, and when considering an object in the left turn, the following parts are given.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant disability”) D.

The defendant in the related case does not state symptoms, diagnosis results, progress of treatment and predictability, etc. concerning the plaintiff's right-hand side while preparing the medical records of the plaintiff around August 2012, but does not state the symptoms, diagnosis results, progress of treatment and predictability, etc., and the defendant has entered only to the right-hand beer, injury disease, etc. and failed to record in detail the matters and opinions concerning the medical treatment and has been stated in a total of four times.