1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, which cited the judgment of the court of first instance, is as follows, with the exception that the court of first instance partially renders the reasons for the judgment as follows:

Therefore, it is accepted in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

[Attachment] From 8 to 10 pages 5 of the judgment (Article 2.c. (2) / [Article 2.(b)] 8 to 10 of the judgment document, whether or not it is very difficult to determine as a person responsible for the promotion of self-explosional cerebral cerebral cerebral cerebral cerebral cerebral cerebral cerebral eption. However, according to the submitted data, it is recognized that a person is in need of urgency, short-term, and chronic cerebral eption. According to the submitted data, since it is recognized that a person is in charge of occupational course or stress that may cause cerebral eption more than 60 hours a week average working hour during 4 weeks prior to the occurrence of the plaintiff, it is deemed reasonable to recognize that the person is suffering from chronic eption.] 5 Myeon 14 to 7 Myeon 2 (Article 2-4(d)).

Judgment

(1) The term "accident of a seafarer of a fishing vessel and a seafarer of a fishing vessel" under Article 2 subparagraph 6 of the "Act on Accident Compensation Insurance for Fishing Vessels" means an injury, disease, physical disability or death of a seafarer of a fishing vessel who is employed to provide labor in a fishing vessel for the purpose of receiving wages.

Therefore, there should be a proximate causal relationship between fishery activities and disaster, and the causal relationship between fishery activities and disaster should be proved by the assertion.

In this case, the proximate causal relation is not necessarily required to be proved by direct evidence in medical and natural science, but indirect facts such as the health condition at the time of employment, existence of existing diseases, the nature of work engaged and the working environment of other seafarers working in the same workplace, and whether they are transferred to the same kind of disease of other seafarers working in the same workplace.