1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff A received treatment from the Defendant for the vertebrate febrate in the following manner:

- During the examination conducted on August 25, 2015, - During the examination of 4,5 vertebrate clocks: (a) the discharge on August 26, 2015; (b) the discharge on August 28, 2015, - Samsung 20000 won, which was hospitalized on August 26, 2015; and (c) the examination of 4,5 vertebrate clocks; and (d) the discharge on August 28, 2015; (c) the discharge on disinfection, etc. conducted on September 31, 2015; and (d) the discharge on September 2, 2015, No. 1350, Sep. 4, 2015; and (d) the non-permanent average of 4,500 U.S. clock clocks (including those on September 15, 2015; and (d) the non-permanent average of 15.

B. On September 16, 2015, Plaintiff A was diagnosed at Samsung Medical Center Nos. 4, 5 and 3, 4, and 5 in Embrate crypitis and vertebrate crypitis 1 and discharged on September 18, 2015 after undergoing crypitis 4, 5 in Embrypitis 3, 4, and 5 in Embrypitis 2015.

C. Plaintiffs B, C, and D are children of Plaintiff A.

[Evidence Evidence] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 to 8, Eul 1 to 9, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Defendant’s medical malpractice on spine surgery with respect to the Plaintiffs A, and post-operation treatment, resulting in side farming in spine.

The defendant violated the obligation to take all measures.

The defendant did not explain to the plaintiff A the possibility of infection in the surgery.

B. There is no Defendant’s medical malpractice on spine surgery and post-operation treatment against the Plaintiff A.

The defendant did not violate the obligation to take all measures.

The defendant explained to the plaintiff A the possibility of infection of the surgery.

Preliminaryly, if the defendant's liability for damages is recognized, the defendant's claim for medical expenses against the plaintiff A should be offset against KRW 3,504,930.

3. Determination

(a) The medical malpractice recognized each of the above facts, evidence No. 10, No. 11, and No. 12 of this Court, the Cartol University.