The defendant's 24,949,305 Won and its 5% per annum from June 18, 2015 to January 14, 2021 to the plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On March 10, 2010, the Plaintiff was diagnosed by the Defendant’s Johovasa department (hereinafter “Defendant Hospital”) from the Defendant, and was diagnosed by the Defendant’s cryptism. On April 10, 2010, the Plaintiff received from the Defendant the 3-4 crypology and the 4-5 vertebrate pressure test from the Defendant.

B. On June 1, 2015, the Plaintiff, who was admitted to the Defendant Hospital, complained of symptoms to the right-free knee, to the right-free side, to the right-free knee and to the right-free knee, and to the effect that it is difficult to mislead the stairs. The Defendant conducted the MRI test, etc., diagnosed the Defendant as “the escape certificate of the prone-propin propin propary propary propary propary propary to the marization,” and planned to perform the surgery.

(c)

On June 9, 2015, the Plaintiff received from the Defendant a 3 balthm balthm thothm 3 in the right side of the Defendant, a balthm balm fluent, and a balthm frithm cirm cirrh cirrhs, both invertebrates (hereinafter “instant surgery”), and discharged on June 19, 2015.

(d)

On June 22, 2015, the Plaintiff entered the Defendant hospital again due to the symptoms of the interlateral distance, and the Defendant conducted the MRI inspection with respect to the Plaintiff, and confirmed the occurrence of the blood species on the part of the surgery, and performed an emergency removal of the blood species.

E. After having received the surgery for removing the dystrophism, the Plaintiff suffered symptoms such as the fall in the sense of strophism around the reproductive organ, and the dystrophism. From October 10, 2016, the Plaintiff was treated with the dystrophism of a hospital.

F. As a result of physical examination, the Plaintiff still has a critical disorder, neutronism, neutronism, and chronological disorder, and the above disability is permanent disability.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Entry B’s evidence No. 1, E hospital head of this Court, F hospital head of this Court’s commission of physical appraisal, the purport of the entire pleadings

2. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. After the instant surgery, the Plaintiff asserted that there was no resistance, reproductive machine, and her mar, left lower her body, and there was no shot sense in part about the bridge and the shot, and there was symptoms of the shotsis and urology.

The defendant is negligent in performing the instant surgery.