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 Plaintiff’s ground of appeal cited in the judgment of the court of first instance asserts that the Plaintiff’s ground of appeal was accompanied by the No. 1 of this case’s injury and disease of “tensions, tensions, salvines, and salvines, etc.,” in the preparatory document dated May 29, 2020, and sought a judgment of the court. However, the part on each of the above injury and disease of which the Plaintiff did not have filed an application for approval of medical care for performing official duties with the Defendant is not subject to the judgment of this court.

It is not significantly different from that of the first instance court, and the fact-finding and judgment of the first instance court are recognized as legitimate even if the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff was presented to this court.

Therefore, this court's reasoning is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the plaintiff's claim was accepted or added as follows (Provided, That among them, the part concerning "the approval of medical care due to official duties as of December 19, 2017" which is not subject to the judgment of the court because both parties did not appeal although the plaintiff's claim was accepted at the court of first instance, shall be cited as it is in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act, and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

[Supplementary or supplementary parts] Part 6 of the judgment of the court of first instance, the "this court" in Part 14 shall be added to "the first instance court".

The following shall be added between the 7th judgment of the first instance and the 12th judgment:

- Whether there is a causal link between the Plaintiff’s occurrence and shooting of the First Injury Disease in this Court’s request for appraisal of this Court - It is difficult to completely eliminate the possibility that the Plaintiff’s performance of shooting while working as a police officer would have promoted the occurrence of the First Injury Disease in this case. However, when comprehensively determining the Plaintiff’s records and radiation images, it is difficult to recognize the causal link between the occurrence of the First Injury Disease in this case beyond the natural progress due to the Plaintiff’s shooting. The escape certificate of the second injury of a horse is one of the following.