1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked;

2. The plaintiff's claim corresponding to the above revocation part.

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is a herb doctor who operates the “E Oriental Medical Institute” in Da in Ma in terms of harmony (hereinafter “E”) and prepared “Daar Fymbium” and “Daar herb drugs,” etc. to the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff is a person who takes the above herb drugs prepared by the Defendant.

B. On May 201, the Plaintiff visited the instant member of the Council, and took advantage of the same upon prescribing a multi-art enzyme from the Defendant.

C. On June 10, 201, the Plaintiff visited the Republic of Korea Council member of the instant case on or around June 10, 201, and took advantage of the 4-day portion of oriental herb drugs from the Defendant. D.

On June 11, 2011, the Plaintiff received the diagnosis of acute cyatitis from the Furterology and asked the Defendant whether he continues to mar medicine, and the Defendant respondeded to the purport that he did not have any particular relationship with Calar medicine and cyatitis, and additionally prescribed multiple mar medicine from the Defendant on the 13th day of the same month and the 16th day of the same month.

E. The Plaintiff, while continuously taking a multi-tetra medicine by the 18th day of the same month, was suffering from urology more severe and was diagnosed to the emergency room at G Hospital on the 20th day of the same month that there was symptoms of urology closing.

F. On the same day, the Plaintiff visited H Hospital and received a diagnosis of “here-bine urine, urine urine urine,” and was hospitalized in the relevant hospital until June 27, 2011, and was hospitalized in the hospital. From the time of discharge, the Plaintiff received medical treatment at the relevant hospital and the relevant Gu University Hospital urology for approximately two months after discharge.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 (including branch numbers for those with branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 3 and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion shows symptoms, such as required closing and luminous infection, to the plaintiff due to the side effects of the instant multilateral herb drugs that the defendant prescribed. Accordingly, the plaintiff's treatment costs of KRW 1,683,510.