1. The Defendant’s KRW 44,731,752 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 5% from January 27, 2016 to April 27, 2017, and the following.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff as a party is a medical corporation that establishes and operates the C Hospital (hereinafter “Plaintiff Hospital”); and the Defendant is a person working for the head of the division in the foregoing hospital.

B. D’s course and process 1) D’s course of surgery were examined by the Defendant from the outside of the hospital of the Plaintiff on January 24, 2009, where the Plaintiff was working as a nurse to the outside hospital of the Plaintiff on December 16, 2008, and December 18, 2008, and was treated as a patient at the rehabilitation department of the Plaintiff hospital. (2) D was diagnosed as L’s Manar Tunelel Synde after receiving treatment from the Defendant on December 24, 2009, and received treatment from the outside hospital of the Plaintiff hospital of the Plaintiff.

3) D on February 4, 2009, at the Plaintiff hospital, the left-hand eromatic eromatic transfer (hereinafter “the first surgery”).

) After being discharged on February 8, 2009, however, complaining for symptoms falling short of fingers and senses, and re-hospitalizeed on February 26, 2009 and on February 27, 2009 (hereinafter “the second surgery”).

4) After the second operation, D had been hospitalized on April 3, 2009, the Plaintiff’s hospital filed an appeal for the knife and pain, and continued hospitalized treatment at the Plaintiff’s hospital. On April 3, 2009, D had been hospitalized under the diagnosis of the multiple sub-compactae Syrome, etc., and now complained of symptoms, such as the pain of the part below hand, including fingers, and the flife, flife, etc., of the part below hand, including fingers.

C. D, etc.’s medical malpractice lawsuit against the Plaintiff 1) D, her husband and children (hereinafter “D, etc.”)

The defendant's medical malpractice

B. 4) The Plaintiff, the Defendant’s employer, filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff, the Defendant, claiming that he suffered the same damage, with the Suwon District Court Branch Branch Decision 2009Gahap3598, and the said court rendered a judgment that only recognized consolation money to D on April 19, 2012 on the grounds of the Defendant’s breach of the duty to explain. 2) The two parties thereafter.