1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. The reasoning of the court’s explanation concerning this case is as follows, and the reasoning of the court’s explanation is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except for the second part as follows. Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil

2. Parts in height:

A. On the fourth part of the judgment of the court of first instance, the "dam clause" in the fourth part of the judgment of the court of first instance is deemed as the "security clause", and the "Association's terms and conditions" in the fifth part of the judgment of the court of first instance are deemed as the "Association's terms and conditions".

B. Part 8 of the Judgment of the first instance court, the first to seventh is as follows.

The plaintiff asserts that the vessel at low tides at low tides on the bottom of the bottom of the naval port where the vessel of this case was anchored is located below the breadth. The vessel at low tides on the bottom of the bottom of the vessel at low tides at low tides. The port side of the vessel of this case at low tides on the wharf and the side of the opposite side is as follows. Under this situation, the sea water remaining in the engine room is on the port side, and the vessel is lying on the left side, and the vessel is coming into the left side, which was opened to enter a large quantity of sea water flowed on the port decks with the northwest winds into the engine through the opening of the guest room floor where the water level is high again (02:00 to 00 on January 26, 2012), the vessel at low tides on the bottom of the vessel at sea was subject to a mutual aid agreement at sea, and the vessel at sea level was not subject to a dive accident at sea.

C. From Nos. 18 to 12 of the judgment of the court of first instance, the number of pages 10 is as follows.

2) Whether the cause of the instant accident constitutes the inherent risk at sea is determined by the Plaintiff’s assertion, and the developments leading up to the Plaintiff’s assertion, through a preparatory document dated August 19, 2013, specifying the specific cause for the first time following the instant accident’s chinyl chloride covering the exhaust gas, which caused sea water to the engine room.