1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the Defendants exceeding the money ordered to be paid under the following subparagraphs shall be revoked.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation in this part is the same as the reasoning for the judgment of the first instance except for dismissal or addition as follows. As such, this part of the reasoning for the judgment of the first instance is cited by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

From the second bottom to the second bottom, each part of the part of the Court's "No. 4 and 5" of 5 from the fourth bottom to the "Court of the first instance" of the fourth part of the "No. 26 July 2013" to the "No. 27 July 2013" to the bottom of the fourth part of the "Plaintiff J" of the second part to the "Plaintiff A".

2. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. On July 26, 2013, the Plaintiffs asserted that: (a) the negligence of a midwife I returned to the Plaintiff C; and (b) the Plaintiff C was negligent in returning the Plaintiff C after a midwife only conducted a single inspection, even though it was necessary to observe the progress of the “unfit fetus state” such as an embryo and bridge at the time of Plaintiff C’s birth to the Defendant hospital, etc. on July 26, 2013.

B) However, as a result of the Plaintiff’s written evidence No. 13 and the first instance court’s entrustment of the medical record appraisal to the chief executive officer of the Korean Medical Association of the first instance court, the following circumstances acknowledged by comprehensively considering the overall purport of the arguments as a result of the request for the supplementation of the medical record to the chief executive officer of the Korean Medical Association of the court, i.e.,: (a) whether the Plaintiff C was a person with a common condition other than the truth-finding at the time; and (b) whether it was a person with a common condition at the time; and (c) whether it was a person with a common condition of the fetus at the time, may be determined by a midwife; (d) the connection of the fetus at the time was observed, but there was no significant impact on the fetus, as long as the fetus was not accompanied by an irregular connection, the reduction of the

(3) The medical record appraisal did not seem to require continuous fetus monitoring at the time and it was judged that there was no time to take additional measures or to be hospitalized without the mother's will.