A. On June 1, 2004, on the part of Hyundai Motor Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Co., Ltd.”) entered the Plaintiff’s partner company, the Plaintiff (BB and male) performed the work of installation of a crypt in the Non-Party D’s factory, installation of a knick string, installation of a knick string, labeling, and adjustment of engine height. On March 4, 2013, the Plaintiff entered the Non-Party Co., Ltd. and performed the work of installation of a fuel tank in the Non-Party E-Party E plant, such as installation of a hyter type prote, assembly of scrying, displaying, and cutting-off correction.

B. In order to correct the difference of the front of the vehicle at around 13:00 on October 18, 2014, the Plaintiff was diagnosed by G Hospital No. 5-6 on October 24, 2014, after receiving medical treatment from the F-type F-type Medical Doctor, and Non-Party Company’s member, while working for the correction of the difference of the front of the vehicle.

C. On November 17, 2014, the Plaintiff applied for the first medical care benefits to the Defendant on the ground that it is difficult to recognize a proximate causal relation between the instant injury and the Plaintiff’s business (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Defendant rendered medical care non-approval (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on December 11, 2014, on the ground that it is difficult to recognize a proximate causal relation between the instant injury and the Plaintiff’s business.

In response to the instant disposition, the Plaintiff filed a request for reexamination to the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Reexamination Committee, but the said request for reexamination was dismissed on April 9, 2015.

[Reasons for Recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 3, 4, Eul evidence 1 (including the number of each issue; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion on June 1, 2004.