1. The plaintiff's primary and conjunctive claims are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On July 18, 201, Non-Party B (hereinafter “the deceased”) complained of, and applied to, the distress, respiratory distress, and smoke in the fire extinguisher in the Gangseo-hee Hospital established and operated by the Defendant.

B. As a result, the medical personnel, who is an employee of the defendant corporation (hereinafter “the medical personnel belonging to the defendant”), conducted a pletoon shooting of the above deceased, conducted a pletoon test and conducted a pulmonary measure before and after having been hospitalized into the pulmonary mechanism, and conducted a lefloxacin test with respect to the deceased. As a result, the medical personnel diagnosed the deceased as a small cell cancer (SCS) [SPS] and the pulmonary cancer (S4N3M1b] and the lefloxacin as a kind of vegetable system.

C. On July 25, 2011, the medical personnel belonging to the Defendant had been before the Deceased’s blood species division for the treatment of psychotropic cancer, and the Deceased’s refusal to perform the psychotropic cancer treatment.

7. Around July 29, 201, the deceased was charged with pulmonary surgery, and around July 29, 201, the deceased was charged with blood species surgery in order to make the pulmonary cancer method again.

The medical team belonging to the defendant changed the sede to tazacta, which is a broad antibiotic on July 29, 2011, to a tazacta on August 1, 2011, when the deceased was in the administration of the above levoflxacin, and instead, it was suspected that the sede has deteriorated the sede incin incin, and instead, it was changed to a tazacta, which is the broad range of antibiotics on July 29, 201, and did not respond accordingly. However, on August 9, 2011, the medical team at the defendant changed the reaction to a tazacta, which is a response to important resistant germs.

E. As the Deceased complained of uneasiness and depression from the inside of the hospital, the medical team belonging to the Defendant: (a) requested a compromise with a psychiatrist around July 27, 201; and (b) upon the recommendation of the psychiatrist in charge of the psychiatrist, the medical team affiliated with the Defendant invested the Deceased’s Tativ as a light-help (SRI) and its selective reabsorbing control system (SRI) other than a selective duplicing.