1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 319,529,93; (b) KRW 4,00,000; and (c) KRW 3,00,000; and (c) each of the above costs to Plaintiff A and D.

1. Basic facts

A. The parties concerned 1) Plaintiff A is a person who was subject to the climatic climatic climatic surgery at G Hospital located in Chungcheongnam-gu, Chungcheongnam-gun, and Plaintiff B is the wife of Plaintiff A, Plaintiff C, and Plaintiff A’s children. 2) H association is an I association that established and operated a G hospital from January 2015 to October 2016, and a medical corporationJ is a medical corporation that established and operated a G hospital from November 2016 to the present day. The Defendant is a medical specialist in the climatic surgery working at G hospital, and the Defendant is a person who performed the climatic climatic climatic surgery with Plaintiff A as a medical specialist in the climatic surgery working at the G hospital.

B. (1) On March 9, 2015, Plaintiff A complained of the pain on the left side of the Plaintiff A, who was diagnosed with G Hospital to alleviate pain, and was provided treatment to G hospital several times until April 2015. (2) Plaintiff A complained of symptoms, stating that “The left hand and arms are sleeped on the right side of the dog,” and was diagnosed with a light signboard disability accompanied by the nephical disease at the said hospital.”

3) After November 23, 2015, Plaintiff A complained of the pain pain and the pain on the left-hand side, and applied to G Hospital. The Defendant conducted a shooting test of the cT on the cT-7th left-hand side of the 3rd-hand side of the 3th anniversary of the 13th anniversary of the same day, diagnosed Plaintiff A with an anti-explosive vaccination on the left-hand side of the 6-7th anniversary of the 13th anniversary of the same day.

The Defendant carried out the instant procedure. The Defendant used Tamcinone 2c and Llocine 2cc in the instant procedure, and stated in the doctor’s order that “Nve Lock Lt. C6-7amination embarracination” was carried out. 4) Plaintiff A complained of the symptoms of the loss of the sense and exercise function on the left side after the instant procedure, and on the day of the procedure, the sense of the loss was recovered at 23:30, and the obstruction of the physical function was continued.

Accordingly, the plaintiff A.