1. The plaintiffs' appeals against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation on this case is that the court's acceptance of the judgment of the first instance is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, except for the addition of the judgment on new arguments in the court below, and thus, it is acceptable to accept it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

【Judgment on the Plaintiff’s new argument in the trial】

A. The Plaintiffs, as to whether they were negligent in changing antibiotics or using additional antibiotics, claimed that the deceased died as of December 16, 201, since 18th of the same month, inasmuch as the deceased’s lebial lebrosis increased and the lebrative lebrosis was aggravated, and the state of around the 22th of the same month of the same month has considerably deteriorated, the Defendants, who were not negligent even though they had been changed to, or additionally used as, other antibiotics except the cell lebrology, an empirical antibiotics, was negligent, and thus,

살피건대, 이 법원의 삼성서울병원장 및 대한의사협회장에 대한 각 진료기록감정촉탁결과에 변론 전체의 취지를 종합하면, 망인의 백혈구 수치가 2011. 12. 14.에는 10,100cells/㎕였는데, 같은 달 16. 12,000cells/㎕, 같은 달 19. 17,500cells/㎕, 같은 달 22. 25,600cells/㎕로 점차 증가한 사실, 일반적으로 발열과 함께 백혈구 수치가 증가하는 등 다른 부위의 감염이 의심되는 경우에는 감염에 대한 항생제를 변경하거나 추가 사용을 검토하기도 하는 사실은 인정된다.

On the other hand, in full view of the results of this court's request for the examination of the medical records on Samsung Seoul Hospital Head, there was no other clear opinion suggesting the deceased's aggravation of infection in addition to the low-heat and the leuk-dial change, such as brain color, dementia, etc.