The defendant is innocent.

1. From May 2009 to November 28, 2010, the Defendant served as blood species and medical specialists at the D Hospital.

A victim E (the age of 51, female) was hospitalized in a F Hospital due to symptoms, such as scarcity, heat, scarcity, etc., and the symptoms worsen, and was suspected of being "pathosome leuk typosis" after being hospitalized in the Repulmonary department of D Hospital on December 26, 2009, and was subject to CT’s pulmonary resuscitation on January 6, 2010. Since the heat continued and the infection cannot be ruled out, the victim E (the age of 51, female) moved to the pulmonary department of image and the pulmonary department of D Hospital on February 14:30, 2010 to the pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary typ.

CT-D HH HH HH HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHE 50,00 or less patients, or where there is a blood risk, such as a response system, it constitutes a gold donation.

During the period between 7 to 10 days after the administration of an anti-climatic cancer to the victim, it is possible to suppress the function of blood transfusion, which leads to a decrease in the blood plate, and when the blood plate decreases, the blood tendency has increased.

On January 27, 2010, Dacocin, the victim, was administered, and this procedure was conducted 9th day thereafter.

In the case of the victim, notwithstanding the blood transfusion, the victim's blood plate value has temporarily increased from 34,000 to 34,000 and has not been recovered. The blood plate and blood cosort factors have been continuously destroyed.

Therefore, in order to consider the maximum effect of blood transfusion, the defendant, who is a doctor in charge, must blood transfusion at the time nearest to the procedure, confirm that the victim's blood plate and PTINR have been corrected during the period during which the effect of the Dacocon administered is not continued, and has been negligent in performing the procedure as long as he/she has neglected his/her duty of care in the course of the procedure.