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 first instance is as follows: Each of the “this court” in the latter part of the judgment of the first instance as “the first instance court”; each of the “non- full-time management” in the third part, “(the plaintiff is 164 cm, 73 km)” was added to “non- full-time management” in the third part 17 and 18; “the management of abnormal support blood transfusion” in the same part 17 and 18 as “the management of abnormal blood transfusion”; “less short” in the sixth part of the 16th part of the 10th 2014 (measurement 17, 2014). From 0.751 g/ m200 m200 to 14th m20 m20 m20 m200 m20 m204 m20 m204 m20 m200 m20 m20 m2.”

In light of the Plaintiff’s working hours, work form, holidays, etc., the Ministry of Employment and Labor’s notification stating matters necessary to determine whether to recognize the occupational disease of cerebrovascular diseases that cannot be deemed to have been seriously performed by the Plaintiff at the time of the outbreak of the instant injury, which provides for matters necessary to determine whether to recognize the occupational disease of cerebrscular diseases. “Where a serious chronic task due to changes in the work environment, etc., causes a serious physical or mental burden that may significantly affect the normal function of cerebrscular or cardiosculars” refers to “where the physical or mental burden that is deemed to have been continuously caused for three months or longer prior to the outbreak of the disease is objectively confirmed” and “where the work hours every twelve weeks prior to the outbreak of the instant injury exceed an average of 64 hours per week average of 60 hours per week during four weeks prior to the outbreak of the disease.”