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 grounds for the court’s explanation concerning the instant case, such as accepting the judgment of the court of first instance, are as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance (including the relevant part of the judgment of the court of first instance, but excluding the part of the judgment of March 2, 199), and therefore, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

2. The amendment shall take place from the last 2th parallel to the 3rd parallel in the following manner:

【The Deceased died due to Eulphane addiction and the heart disease of the witness for the merger, which is the injury-disease approved for the medical treatment, or the death of the Deceased due to the combination of sulfur, Eulphal gas, and chronic closed-pulmonary disease, etc. caused by sulfur, Eulphical gas, and sulfur oxide, etc. exposed to the Deceased while on duty at the Radic temperature, there is a proximate causal relation between the deceased’s work and the death. Therefore, the instant disposition is unlawful. Accordingly, the “this Court” of the 10th day below the 5th day is regarded as the “court of the first instance.”

5 The 2 to 6 pages shall be raised up to 5:

2) In light of the following circumstances as seen earlier and the overall purport of the arguments, there is a proximate causal link between the report on the evidence Nos. 3, 5, and 15 and the fact-finding on the president of the Industrial Safety and Health Research Institute and the president of the Seoul Medical Center based on the findings of the fact-finding and the fact-finding on the Plaintiff’s medical care.

It is not sufficient to recognize that the deceased died of chronic pulmonary diseases due to exposure to sulfur, sulfur oxide, and sulfur oxide while on duty at the sulphal temperature, and that there was a chronic pulmonary disease, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge that there was no other evidence.

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

A person shall be appointed.

3. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim shall be dismissed as it is without merit.

The judgment of the court of first instance is the same.