1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of this case cited in the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, in addition to adding the following judgments even after examining the allegations, etc. presented at the court of first instance by the plaintiff, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 4

2. The Plaintiff asserts that there exists a proximate causal relationship between the previous approval branch and the brain bordering, and that the instant disposition is unlawful, as the brain bordering that the Plaintiff applied for the approval of an additional injury and injury caused by serious stress arising from the above injury and injury, and thus, there is a proximate causal relation between the previous approval branch and the brain bordering.

However, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff on the fact that there is a proximate causal relation with psychological stress caused by an existing injury such as a mental disorder in the quality of the diagnosis after at least one year and four months after the occurrence of the instant accident, is insufficient to recognize this. Rather, according to the result of the medical record appraisal entrustment with respect to the head of the Association of the party-by-case E Association, the brain color caused to the Plaintiff is not a psychological stress but an existing disease of the Plaintiff. Thus, the Plaintiff’s above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.