A. The deceased D (the Plaintiff’s husband, the Plaintiff’s husband, the deceased on April 8, 2013), the deceased E (the Plaintiff’s husband, the Plaintiff’s husband, the death on May 20, 2013), and the network F (the Plaintiff’s husband, the Plaintiff’s husband, and the deceased on March 8, 2014) (hereinafter collectively referred to as “the network”) were diagnosed with pneumoconiosis as indicated in the following table and were granted a disability grade. The network was from Jun. 14, 2002 to be a complication of pneumoconiosis (the engine infection). From Feb. 14, 2005 to Feb. 14, 2005 to be a high level of cardiopulmonary function disorder caused by pneumoconiosis, the networkF was dead due to a merger with pneumoconiosis (a pulmonary tuberculosis) from May 19, 2004.

As a result of the determination of the name of the deceased's workplace on the date of the diagnosis of the deceased, G 4A-F0 on May 26, 1998, G 4A- From November 15, 200, 11-Class 4A-F1/2 (US) - Grade 9-H 1/2 on June 14, 2002 - Hep 1/2 on November 11, 2002, H 11-H 1/2 (US) - Non-activity pulmonary tuberculosis (B) - 11- 11 of Grade 11, 2003 - 10- 10- 14 of 2005 - Non- Activity pulmonary tuberculosis (P) - Non-Activities 13 (B) - 10-14 of 205 - 10-13 of 14.20

B. The Plaintiffs filed a claim against the Defendant for unpaid insurance benefits (Disability Benefits) against each deceased, but the Defendant rendered a claim against the Plaintiffs on December 7, 2015, on the ground that the deceased died during the medical care, each of the unpaid insurance benefits (Disability Benefits) site pay disposition (hereinafter collectively referred to as “each of the instant dispositions”) was rendered on the ground that the cause for the payment of disability benefits was not “if the injury or disease was cured and has a disability in the body, etc. after recovery.”

C. The Plaintiffs appealed and filed a request for examination and reexamination, but all of them were dismissed.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, each entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4 (including virtual numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether each of the dispositions of this case is legitimate

A. The Plaintiffs’ assertion of pneumoconiosis is even if it is impossible to completely recover from modern medicine, and it leaves a workplace where dust has occurred.