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 of the court’s explanation as to this case is as follows, except for the addition or dismissal of the corresponding part of the judgment of the first instance, and therefore, it is identical to the ground of the judgment of the first instance. Thus, it shall be cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

(Additional or height parts) The 5th parallel 15th parallel pressure shall be the blood pressure.

On the 7th following the 12th century, “-non-high-frequency mercury is generally known to have reached approximately 2% of adult population, and the frequency of occurrence is relatively high in some genetic diseases such as the family history, age increase, women, smoking, and pyrody diseases of brain ties, and the Plaintiff is deemed to have found the brain ties during the examination due to external wounds and to have no relation to the accident of this case.”

The 8th page 9 is added to the following nine pages: “Opinion on the Hospital of the Chungcheongnambuk University, it is difficult to readily conclude that the steel structure work, excessive stress, etc. are the direct cause of the intension cerebral chrony.”

Part 8 12 "A" is changed into "entry", Article 4 "Article 5", and Article 10 No. 13 "H" is changed into "C".

Part XI: The following shall apply at the last place of conduct and shall add the following:

The Plaintiff filed a claim for damages against I, who suffered from injury, such as non-high-frequency mercury, etc. due to the instant accident against B, on the ground that B’s poor working environment, such as noise, excessive work, etc., and occupational course, stress, and the instant accident caused by multiple causes, such as high blood pressure and chronic renal failure, etc. However, on May 10, 2013, the Plaintiff was sentenced to the dismissal judgment in the case No. 2012Gaso47592, Gwangju District Court Decision 2013Na658, which was the appellate court on August 27, 2014, and recognized the causal relationship with the instant accident.