1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs and the defendants are dismissed.

2. One-half of the appeal costs shall be the plaintiffs, and the remainder.

1. The reasoning for the court's explanation of this case is that the evidence submitted additionally in the trial of the court of first instance, which is insufficient to recognize the defendant's assertion, Eul evidence Nos. 9-1 to 14, and that "B. Breach of Duty to explain and the causal relationship with the deceased's death" in the 12th judgment of the court of first instance shall be "B. Breach of Duty to explain", "The defendant hospital" in the 16th judgment of the court of first instance shall be deemed to be excluded from the opportunity to make such a choice because it could not hear all of the medical institutions in lieu of the defendant hospital", and "the proximate causal relationship between the deceased's death can be sufficiently recognized," and "the reason for the judgment of the court of first instance shall be as stated in the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act other than the part of the judgment of the court of first instance."

2. In conclusion, the plaintiffs' claims against the defendants are accepted within the scope of the above recognition, and all of the remaining claims are dismissed as they are without merit. The judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and all appeals filed by the plaintiffs and the defendants are dismissed as they are without merit.