1. All appeals filed by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) against the principal lawsuit and counterclaim are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be principal lawsuit and counterclaim.

1. The reasoning of the court of first instance’s explanation concerning this case is as follows: (b) the part of “the Defendant’s name of diagnosis and disease” in the judgment of the court of first instance other than the following is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance; and (c) thus, this part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

(Attachment Terms and Conditions). 2. The main claim and counterclaims made by the Defendant are health, and the issues of this case are whether the Defendant’s workplace cancer, which is the Defendant’s disease, is deemed to be “cryp” as prescribed in the insurance contract of this case, and whether it is “crypity.” This paper examines them.

A. An international disease classification (ICD-O, No. 3) published in 2000 for the species of workplace Kazine World was given 1/3 of the behavior code to all the Kazine crym crym crym crym crym crym crym crym crym crym crym crym crym crym crym crym crym crym crym crym crym crym cirm.

) A) The Kaurian Round was entitled to order the various kinds of Kaurine fluor as “the molecule fluor,” and classified them into one to four categories (grade I to IV) according to the opinion that it is inappropriate to assign Kaur Round to all the kinds of Kaur Round, and divided them into one to eight categories (grade I to IV), and there is no grade formation and blood ties, and the species of the Kaur Round with the point of occupation and occupation limited to 1 m or lower, and divided them into one class, one class (gra, usly or balor bal, and one class). After that, in the latter case, it is not appropriate to grant 1/3 of the 2010 Kaol Kaol Kaol Kaol Kaol Kaol Kaol Kaol, but it is basically deemed to be an independent Kaol 200 Kaol Kaol Kaol Doo 2, etc.