1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 6,000,000 and KRW 3,000,00 among them.

1. The reasoning of the court concerning this part of the facts of recognition and the plaintiff's assertion is as stated in Articles 1 and 20 of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this part is cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

2. Determination

A. When a doctor of the relevant legal doctrine provides medical services, such as medical examination and treatment, he/she has a duty of care to take the best measures required to prevent risks depending on the patient’s specific symptoms or circumstances in light of the nature of the duties of managing human life,

The duty of care of a doctor shall be based on the level of medical practice performed in the field of clinical medicine, such as a medical institution, at the time of the performance of medical practice. The level of medical care refers to the so-called medical common sense generally known to and known to a normal doctor at the time of the performance of medical practice. Therefore, it should be determined at a normative level in consideration of the environment

In addition, in a claim for damages due to breach of duty of care in medical practice, the burden of proof is mitigated so that the injured party can be held liable for damages by estimating the causal relationship between the medical negligence and the result in the medical practice in cases where it is proved that the injured party could not have any other cause than a series of medical practice, on the basis of the common sense of the general public, and that the other cause other than a series of medical practice cannot be discovered (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2016Da26606, 26613, Nov. 29, 2018).

In the case of this case, as seen earlier than the violation of the duty of care in the first medical practice, G states that “beatis shall be administered only when symptoms are confirmed through Feritin test, etc.,” and the judgment of the court of the first instance also states that “in the case of an empty patient,” the degree of appraisal by the court of the first instance is generally “in the case of an empty patient with blood, feritin, iron-combined agriculture, steel-combined agriculture, b12, b12, and acid concentration, etc., in the case of lack of iron, the steel product is lacking.