1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows, except for the cases where the plaintiffs make an additional determination as to the allegations emphasized or added by this court, and thus, it is acceptable to accept it according to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

2. The plaintiffs' assertion ① At the time of the first report after the deceased's accident, the reporter was used in mountain, and the fire officers belonging to the defendant sent a rescue unit in consideration of the disaster location. However, the fire officers belonging to the defendant should have called the rescue unit.

② In the case of mountain accidents, it is generally possible to order helicopter landings, and even if trees are the remote places, rescue activities using the transport loading and unloading equipment that makes it difficult to move from the power of the people of the walst, are sufficiently possible. However, the fire officers belonging to the defendant were delayed in the transfer for two hours due to the failure to follow the direction of helicopter mobilization.

③ The deceased’s arrival at the H hospital and the CT shooting took place 13 minutes later, due to the fact that first aid workers did not contact the H hospital in advance, and it appears that the H hospital did not take appropriate pharmacologic treatment and treatment.

In addition, in light of the fact that blood pressure rapidly increased in the course of transferring the deceased to a H hospital, the beer and blood pressure of the deceased at the time of arrival at the H hospital was in a state without significant change, the transfer of the deceased to a local emergency medical institution without a doctor’s instructions is the negligence of the Defendant’s public official.

3. We examine the above argument ①

According to the testimony of E, the first reporter, E, was located far from the scene of the accident, but it was reported by the first reporter, etc. after receiving the phone calls from the deceased, etc., and the report was called to be promptly called to the Bobane at the time of the report.