1. The defendant shall be 10,00,000 won to the plaintiff A, 2,00,000 won to the plaintiff B, and 4,197,546 won to the plaintiff C and each of the above amounts.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. A physician has a duty of care to take the best measures required to prevent risks depending on the patient’s specific symptoms or circumstances in light of the characteristics of the duties of managing the patient’s life, body, and health, and such duty of care is based on the level of medical practice performed in the clinical medicine field, including a medical institution, at the time of the medical practice. The level of medical care is generally known and recognized at the time of the medical practice by an ordinary doctor at the time of the medical practice. As such, a normative level should be determined by considering the environment and conditions of the medical practice, the peculiarity of the medical practice, etc. Furthermore, a diagnosis is an important medical act that is selected by the Medical Treatment Act, including identifying whether the disease is disease or not, its kind, character, and degree of progress. Thus, in determining whether there is negligence in the diagnosis, even if it is impossible to conduct the complete clinical diagnosis in the process, it should be determined within the scope of diagnosis at least within the level of clinical medicine as a result of the diagnosis’s best ethical knowledge and experience required as a result of the diagnosis and predicting the patient.

(Supreme Court Decision 2003Da33875 Decided April 9, 2004, Supreme Court Decision 2010Da76849 Decided September 13, 2012, and Supreme Court Decision 2014Da233190 Decided July 9, 2015, etc.)

The following facts are either not disputed between the parties, or described in Gap evidence 1 to 4, 8, and Eul evidence 3 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and appraiser D.