beta
(영문) 대구고등법원 2015.05.15 2014누5836

장해등급결정처분취소

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On January 208, 2008, the Plaintiff, upon receiving a brain salvology surgery from the Defendant on or around January 23, 2010, completed the registration of a disabled person upon receiving a disability grade 2 from the Defendant on or around January 23, 2010.

B. On June 25, 2013, the Defendant, following the Plaintiff’s disability grade 4 disability determination procedure for the Plaintiff’s disability grade (hereinafter “instant disposition”). The reasons for the instant disposition are as follows: (a) although the Plaintiff suffered a paralysis for the left-hand part after the brain flasing outbreak in 2007, the degree of paralysis was insignificant in class 4 on the left-hand part; (b) after the operation on the brain flasing on January 2008 in the medical record, the remainder except class 4 on June 2008 on the left-hand part after the operation was normal; (c) on January 25, 2013, the nursing record on January 2013, it appears that the Plaintiff’s daily life was “flading by using a stick; (d) the fact that the Plaintiff entered it in the state of alves old age under additional opinion; (e) the fact that brain image data, progress of treatment, etc., it appears that it is necessary for the Plaintiff to perform another’s daily life and operation.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 3, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) The plaintiff's assertion was conducted on January 2008, and it is necessary to assist others in performing all daily activities, such as walking, seating, urine, and urology up to now, and thus constitutes class 2 of the cerebral disease disorder. Therefore, the defendant's disposition of this case based on different premise is unlawful. 2) The plaintiff's assertion is merely legitimate because it is possible to carry out most daily activities, and it constitutes class 4 of the cerebral disease disorder, as it is alleged by the plaintiff.