추가상병불승인처분취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On August 21, 2017, at around 11:10, the Plaintiff was involved in an accident where the Plaintiff was faced with chests on the Indian Complex No. 1st floor of Seongdong-gu Seoul, Seongdong-gu, Seoul, for the first floor wastes of the building, and the wastes were loaded onto the vehicle and cut off from the vehicle, and fell at a height of 1.5 meters from the 1.5 meters of the vehicle and fell from the 1.5 meters of the vehicle and fell on the delivery guard (hereinafter “the instant accident”).
The Plaintiff was diagnosed with injury of the “absages 8 and 9” (hereinafter referred to as the “absages 8 and 9”) due to the instant disaster, and received medical care approval from the Defendant.
B. On November 10, 2017, the Plaintiff received an additional diagnosis of the instant additional disease certificate No. 5 (hereinafter “instant additional disease”) and filed an application for the approval of the additional disease with the Defendant. On November 24, 2017, the Defendant rendered a disposition of non-approval of the Plaintiff’s additional disease application (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
C. On November 30, 2017, the Plaintiff appealed and filed a request for an examination to the Defendant, but the request for an examination was dismissed on February 19, 2018.
[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 (including paper numbers), Eul evidence 1, 2 (including paper numbers), and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The plaintiff's assertion is that the plaintiff was faced with the lower part of the chest on the road boundary on the day after India was faced with the lower part at the time of the accident at the time of the accident in this case.
As a result, there were symptoms, such as the pain, paralysis, and low-forest, on the left side of the instant disaster and bridge, which had not existed before the instant accident, and accordingly, the instant additional injury and disease was diagnosed accordingly.
Therefore, even if there is a proximate causal relation between the instant additional branch and the instant accident, the Defendant’s disposition of the instant case should be revoked as unlawful.
B. Determination 1 occupational accidents are receiving medical care.