1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to be paid below shall be revoked.

Basic Facts

On August 8, 2013, the parties concerned Plaintiff (Divers) was a person who received light vertebrate and light climatic marology surgery (hereinafter “instant surgery”) at the F-type hospital located in Gangnam-gu Seoul E building (hereinafter “Defendant Hospital”); Defendant C was a doctor who performed the instant surgery; Defendant B was an employer of Defendant C, who operated the Defendant Hospital.

The plaintiff's past history started medical treatment after receiving a high blood pressure diagnosis in around 2003, received an emergency operation due to the same year, and around 2004, suffered from kidneitis in around 2008.

On July 18, 2011, the Plaintiff was hospitalized in the Defendant Hospital due to the closure of the body part No. 1 in the 1st century, and was hospitalized in the Defendant Hospital with the same symptoms from August 3, 2011 to August 8, 2011.

In addition, on September 22, 2012, the Plaintiff was diagnosed as being accompanied by a military register duososososre, -1.0 normal level, -1.0 to -2.5 Maososososososososososososs, -2.5 if it is not more than -2.5, the Plaintiff was diagnosed as being accompanied by a military register duososososososs.2.

On the other hand, the plaintiff was taking advantage of the flat anti-hovascular system.

On August 7, 2013, 2013, the Plaintiff’s hospitalization process and the progress of the Plaintiff complained of the fact that there was a pain on the left side of the 20th day before the Plaintiff’s admission, and that it is difficult for the Plaintiff to feel a pain in both sides of the yeast cage, and that the Plaintiff was hospitalized in the Defendant hospital upon the diagnosis of the closure frame of the pelra Nos. 11 and 12 accompanied by detailed obscure military register cages, which were applied to the Defendant hospital by visiting the pelra and the pelra No. 11 and 12.

As a result of blood test conducted on August 7, 2013 by the medical personnel of the Defendant Hospital against the Plaintiff, the most important function of the blood plate is the blood transfusion, so the decrease in the blood plate value is an index reflecting the possibility of blood transfusion.

The normal range is 123,000/m.