1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On November 17, 2010, the Plaintiff filed a “Cental clinic” in the location of the Pakistan-si operated by the Defendant on the grounds of inconvenience caused by dental scrap metal.

B. From December 7, 2010 to May 25, 2011 with the Plaintiff’s consent, the Defendant: (a) confirmed the Plaintiff’s dental condition; and (b) carried out dental surgery and coloning the Defendant around September 26, 201, with the Defendant’s consent; (c) performed the removal or storage of pre-existing scrap metal products; (d) 18 fluorries (one to five times each time; (c) one of them was not arranged by the arrangement issue until the closing date of the instant argument; and (d) carried out the adjustment of fluoring surgery with the Defendant on September 26, 201, when continuously observing the Plaintiff’s condition.

(hereinafter the Defendant’s dental treatment that the Defendant performed to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant treatment”).

The total medical expenses incurred by the Plaintiff from February 8, 201 to December 26, 2014 during which the instant treatment was pending, are KRW 23,538,730, and the amount borne by the Plaintiff is KRW 23,429,660.

【Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments;

A. The Plaintiff 1, while performing the instant treatment, failed to perform the duty of care required for ordinary dentists in light of the level of clinical medicine at the time. The Defendant committed negligence that prevents the Plaintiff from finding the “scambling and loss of dental scrap metal” caused by the discontinuance of inappropriate diagnosis and treatment even after the treatment was performed.

As a result, the Plaintiff has not yet been planted one set, and the four of them were omitted, and the total of the upper spaws did not meet the total of the lower spaws and the side effects occurred in the future. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s total amount of KRW 39,250,000, which the Plaintiff paid to the Defendant on the ground of nonperformance or tort, is limited to KRW 23,50,000.