The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. From April 19, 1971 to September 2, 1989, the Plaintiff (B) served as the assistant seafarer, the senior seafarer, the senior citizen, the senior citizen, the senior citizen, the senior citizen, the senior citizen, the senior citizen, the senior citizen, the senior citizen, the senior citizens, the senior citizens, the senior citizens, the senior citizens, the senior citizens, the senior citizens, the Naba, the senior citizens, and the senior discharged from military service

On January 18, 2018, the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant injury and disease”) diagnosed as “malutism” (hereinafter “instant injury and disease”) and applied for approval of medical care for official duties to the Defendant.

B. On January 10, 2020, the Defendant rendered a decision not to grant medical treatment for official duties (hereinafter “the instant disposition”) against the Plaintiff on the ground that “it is difficult to see that there exists an inherent special tenant from the Plaintiff’s working conditions or working environment, and the Plaintiff’s physical and mental factors and caused the instant injury and disease by combined action, and it is difficult to see that there is a substantial causal relationship between the Plaintiff’s official duties and the instant injury and disease.”

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap's 1, 2, Eul's 1-1 to 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff was exposed to the determined-type glass dust and various harmful dust generated from coal trains while working on the railroad tracks. Since the plaintiff smoked for three years from 1964 to 1967, and obstructed smoking for about fifty years from the date of the diagnosis of the disease of this case, it is reasonable to deem that the disease of this case has a proximate causal relation with the plaintiff's duties, the defendant's disposition of this case on the premise that there was a different causal relation with the plaintiff's duties should be revoked.

B. Determination 1) As the former Public Officials Pension Act (wholly amended by Act No. 15523, Mar. 20, 2018) refers to a disease or injury caused by an official duty while performing official duties, “a disease or injury caused by an official duty” under Article 35(1) of the same Act refers to a disease or injury caused by an official duty. Therefore, proximate causal relation between the official duty and the disease or injury should be verified by the assertion.