1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The reasons for this court's explanation are as follows: (a) the reference to the judgment of the court of first instance: (b) the reference to the judgment of the court of first instance is to read the "nex.." of the 8-9 of the 3th judgment of the court of first instance; (c) the reference to the "n.........." of the 5th and 11 of the 10th judgment; (d) the reference to the "n............" of the 7th judgment; and (e) the reference to the "n............." of the 14th judgment" of the 7th judgment; and (e) the reference to the "n.....................""

[Supplementary Part 1] In addition, at the time of the first operation on March 4, 2008, the medical personnel of the Defendant Hospital diagnosed as a brupt cancer as a result of the organizational examination on the left-hand brusium of the deceased at the time of the first operation on March 24, 2008. On March 24, 2008, the medical personnel of the Defendant Hospital diagnosed as the crusium and confirmed that the left-hand brusium was a crusium that was transferred to the brusium, not the crus ledger, and therefore, it was negligent in failing to conduct the organizational examination on whether there was a brusium brus

[Supplementary Part 2] According to the result of the examination of medical records as to the head of the Seoul Hospital at the Sincheon-do University, the appraisal shows his opinion that “the left-hand body, almost or almost all, appears to have been removed on the video of the computerized group (Defendant hospital) implemented on March 4, 2008,” and whether the observation on the computer group image of the computer group implemented on October 13, 2008 and the computer group image of the computer group (H hospital) implemented on November 13, 2008 is not clear as to whether it is a small organization, or as to whether it is a closed-down or repeated diverse that was implemented on November 13, 2008.” [Supplementary part 3] Whether the Defendant hospital is responsible for the negligence of failing to conduct the organizational inspection on the right-hand body; and whether the Defendant hospital is responsible for the negligence of failing to conduct the organizational inspection on the right-hand body.”