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. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this part is that the part concerning “the date of precise diagnosis of pneumoconiosis” under the second sentence of the judgment of the court of first instance was diagnosed as pneumoconiosis, and that part of “the third sentence was “(8).” (hereinafter “instant disposition”) of the part concerning “the bereaved family’s benefits, funeral expenses, application for correction of average wages for pneumoconiosis consolation benefits, and non-approval of the claim for difference in insurance benefits,” which are the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, in addition to each dismissal, the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance. Therefore, this part is cited as it is in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) In the case where the diagnosis of pneumoconiosis has become final and conclusive after his retirement, first of all, the average wage should be calculated by applying Article 26 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 16871 of Jun. 27, 2000 and enforced on July 1, 2000). However, in the case of the deceased, the average wage should not be calculated by applying Article 26 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 16871 of Jun. 27, 2000).

However, immediately before the deceased’s retirement.