1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. This court's explanation concerning this part of the reasons for the disposition is the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, citing it in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is against the disposition of this case made on a different premise, on the ground that: (a) the Plaintiff’s assertion that the coal dust passed through a special mard by using a voltage source in the half-month area of the Daesung Industries; and (b) such work is classified into mining as “fluor and other fluort coal production”; and (c) the above workplace where the person works for the deceased constitutes a workplace to which the former Pneumoconiosis Prevention Act applies; and (d) such other premise is unlawful.

(b) The details of the relevant statutes are as shown in the attached statutes.

C. According to Article 24(4) of the former Pneumoconiosis Prevention Act, bereaved family consolation benefits under Article 24(1)3 of the same Act shall be paid in cases where a worker dies of pneumoconiosis and became the beneficiary of bereaved family benefits under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act.

However, according to Article 3 of the same Act and Article 2 and attached Table 1 of the Enforcement Decree thereof, the above Act applies only to the projects corresponding to certain mining operations, such as coal mining (excluding smoke coal and other fuel production business), iron mining, tran mining, and tran mining.

Therefore, in order to receive bereaved family consolation benefits under Article 24(1)3 of the former Pneumoconiosis Prevention Act, the place of business where the employee had worked falls under the workplace where the business corresponding to the above certain mining operations is conducted.

In full view of the results of the fact-finding and the overall purport of the arguments against the Daesung Industrial Co., Ltd. of this court, the half-month point in the Daesung Industrial Co., Ltd. of the Republic of Korea was produced with coal and other responseless coal. At the time, the half-month point was supplied with coal from outside and was low, but it was manufactured with coal in the factory itself.