1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff, including the costs of supplementary participation.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation of the instant case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance except for adding the judgment as described in Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act with respect to the Plaintiff’s assertion, which is particularly emphasized by the trial of the first instance.

2. Additional determination

A. At around 01:30 on August 19, 2012, the Plaintiff’s assertion deceased, who felled and died in the course of the CPB chrode upper part of the CPB chrode so as to connect the refluor newly installed on the wall and the refluor in the upper part of the pre-existing chrode flag so that it can operate in a single operating position.

As such, the deceased died while performing his duties, and even if there is a proximate causal relationship between the deceased’s death and his duties, the instant disposition by the Defendant on a different premise is unlawful.

B. Determination 1) In order to be recognized as a death due to an occupational reason as stipulated in Article 5 subparag. 1 of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act, the death in question occurred due to the death in question, and there is a proximate causal relation between the work and the accident. In this case, the causal relation between the worker’s work and the accident should be proved by the assertion. Thus, if the worker’s private life is unclear, it cannot be presumed that the worker’s death was caused by his work (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2003Du8449, Dec. 26, 2003). According to each of the above legal principles, it is acknowledged that the original parts of the case, which were stored in the chromoth of the chromoth and the evidence Nos. 6 through 14, were cut to the chromoth of the deceased, and the deceased was found to have removed the electric wire of the existing chromoth of the chromoth and thus,

However, in full view of the following circumstances, each of the above evidence and evidence set forth in Nos. 5, 8, 10, 14, and 19 and each of the following circumstances recognized as a result of on-site inspection by this Court.