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 for the court's explanation of this case is as follows: (1) No. 8, 17, and 18 of the judgment of the first instance; (2) No. 8, 17, and 18; and (3) No. 2, attached Table 2 of the Enforcement Decree provides that "No data can be available to know the state of C from June 2014 to the present." (4) the meaning of "No. 5, 12, and No. 7," and the meaning of "no. 4, with the exception of an obvious obstacle to the function or mental function of the "mal system," and the meaning of "no. 6, with the exception of the degree of 10,000 people's ability to work." (6) The rate of loss of the plaintiff's ability to work based on the above F Hospital and G doctor's response to medical treatment constitutes 76% of the total capacity to work entrusted by the court of first instance based on the 6-1, 2014, respectively.

2. Conclusion, the Plaintiff’s instant case.