장해급여부지급처분취소
1. The Defendant’s disposition to pay disability benefits to the Plaintiff on November 16, 2016 is revoked.
2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. From October 30, 1962 to November 29, 1974, the Plaintiff (B) was a person working for the Korea Coal Corporation CY for about 12 years from the date of November 30, 1962 to November 29, 1974, and on March 18, 2016, the Plaintiff (B) diagnosed the instant injury, which was “Sopical nephical nephalopological ecte, and the Highly Mopical Distress (hereinafter “the instant injury”). On May 18, 2016, the Plaintiff (B) filed an application for the payment of disability benefits, claiming that the instant injury was caused by exposure to the mine noise from the CY to the Defendant, who was exposed to the mine noise from the CY during the period from 1962 to 1974.
B. On November 16, 2016, the Defendant determined the Plaintiff’s salary of the site for disability benefits on the ground that “The result of the request for deliberation to the Integrated Review Council of the Daegu Regional Headquarters according to the results of the special diagnosis of the D Hospital is the result of the request by the D Hospital to the Integrated Review Council, and thus, it is difficult to recognize the case as
hereinafter referred to as "disposition of this case"
(C) The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed a request for review with the Board of Audit and Inspection. However, on July 27, 2018, the Board of Audit and Inspection dismissed the Plaintiff’s request for review on the ground that “it is difficult to accept the Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant injury or disease falls under the noise risk agency, which is an occupational disease.” [In the absence of any dispute over the grounds for recognition, the entries in subparagraphs A through 3 and 7, and the purport
2. The parties' assertion
A. The plaintiff's argument is that the plaintiff's hearing is a noise-related hearing or at least senior citizens' distress has deteriorated beyond natural progress by exposure to noise.
B. The plaintiff's assertion that the disease of this case was diagnosed by the defendant was 82 years old since 42 years old since leaving the noise workplace, and that the 65 years old person's age accounts for 75% of the total loss of hearing ability in the event of mixing with the elderly people's suffering from noise and the elderly people's suffering from the noise, the elderly people's suffering accounts for 75% of the total loss of hearing ability. The plaintiff shows the hearing ability corresponding to the hearing ability of the elderly people's suffering from the high blood pressure and urology at the time of the diagnosis of the disease of this case, and the plaintiff was suffering from the high blood pressure and urology at the workplace of work.