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 court of first instance’s explanation concerning the instant case is as follows, except where a judgment on the Plaintiff’s assertion is added under Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, the same shall apply to the reasoning of the first instance judgment.

(Other grounds alleged by the Plaintiff in the appeal do not differ significantly from the contents alleged by the Plaintiff in the first instance court, and even if all the evidence submitted by the first instance court and this court are examined, the fact-finding and judgment by the first instance court is justifiable). [Article 25 of the second instance judgment “No. 2” in the second instance judgment of the second instance judgment “from January 1, 1987 to September 27, 1991,” “No. 15” in the second instance judgment of the second instance judgment of the second instance.

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is as follows: (a) the Deceased failed to perform the pulmonary function examination on April 13, 2010 after the pulmonary function examination; and (b) it is difficult to accurately ascertain whether the pulmonary function has deteriorated; (c) however, according to the result of the first instance court and the fact-finding examination with respect to the department of Seoul Medical Center’s occupation and the department of Seoul Medical Center’s work environment, the pneumoconiosis and chronic closed-pulmonary disease of

Since the construction rate of the heart was improved and the depth was normalized as a result of the death of the deceased before the death, it is difficult to view that the heart, which is an existing disease, contributed to the outbreak of the death that is a direct death of the deceased, even if the heart contributed a considerable portion of the heart, it is highly likely that the pneumoconiosis symptoms and the chronic closed-pulmonary disease of the merged witness caused the death of the deceased by continuous burden at the heart, and that the chronic pulmonary disease of the deceased was caused by the death of the heart through the combination with the existing heart. Therefore, proximate causal relation between the death and the pneumoconiosis or the combination thereof can be acknowledged.

(b).