1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. On October 5, 2010, the following facts were diagnosed by the Plaintiff that the Defendant medical corporation was undergoing a diagnosis from the Defendant B that there was savinary safinary safinary safinary at the Bupyeong Forest Hospital operated by the Defendant Medical Foundation (hereinafter “Defendant Foundation”). Around January 28, 2011, the fact that the Plaintiff received a qualitative safinary safic safic safic safic safic safics (hereinafter “instant surgery”)

2. The plaintiff asserts that the plaintiff suffered damage from the negligence of defendant B in the course of the instant surgery, and that the defendant Eul is the employer of defendant B, and that the defendant foundation is the employer of defendant B, and the defendant foundation is jointly and severally liable to compensate the plaintiff for damages of KRW 15,00,000 and consolation money of KRW 6,00,000 as an employer's liability under the Civil Act.

3. Determination

A. In a case where a subsequent disability is caused by medical practice in light of the relevant legal principles, unless there are circumstances where the symptoms are deemed to have exceeded the generally recognized scope of complication in light of the content and procedure of medical practice, the occurrence and degree of merger, the medical level at the time, and the degree of care of the medical personnel in charge, etc., in a case where the subsequent disability may be caused by a combination of the relevant medical practice processes, even if the best measure at the time was taken, or by the combination thereof could be secondary occurrence, it cannot be presumed that the occurrence of the subsequent disability was negligent in the course of medical practice solely on the basis of the occurrence of the relevant medical practice.

(Supreme Court Decision 2007Da76290 Decided October 27, 2008). (B)

According to the result of the court’s physical appraisal of appraiser C of this case, the fact that the plaintiff was treated as an crypical typical typological typological typical typological typological typological typological typological typological typological typological typological typological typological typological typical

However, the damage to the patriarche is a patriarchic spatrine spatrif.