요양승인처분취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. The plaintiff entered into a contract with the Corporation for the Construction of the Co., Ltd. Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the “instant Corporation”) in B, and subcontracted the construction of the board to D among them, and E is a daily employed worker belonging to D, who is in charge of the prefabricated-type foundation at the construction site of this case.
B. At around 07:20 on May 3, 2019, E was involved in a traffic accident while getting a representative F from D’s 07:20, and going to work at the construction site of the instant construction site. As a result, E claimed that “Scarleting, scarleting, and scarinitis” (hereinafter “instant injury and disease”), and filed an application for medical care benefits for the instant injury and disease with the Defendant on June 18, 2019.
C. Accordingly, on July 29, 2019, the Defendant rendered a decision to approve the application for medical care benefits of E for the instant injury and disease (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 5, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination on the defense prior to the merits
A. The gist of the defendant's defense is that the plaintiff is not the direct counter-party to the disposition of this case, and the disposition of this case cannot be deemed as an infringing administrative disposition that directly imposes an obligation on the plaintiff or causes a legal effect that restricts rights and interests. The plaintiff, designated as the business owner in relation to a specific occupational accident, may increase industrial accident insurance premiums in the future, but in such a case, the plaintiff, as the business owner, may file an appeal lawsuit separately, so the lawsuit of this case
B. In order to seek revocation or change of an illegal administrative disposition 1, a person whose right to file an administrative suit against a disposition agency is infringed shall be deemed a direct counter-party to the disposition. However, even if a third party is not the direct counter-party to the administrative disposition, if the interests protected by law are infringed by the administrative disposition in question.