2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

A. On March 9, 2017, the Plaintiff: (a) diagnosed the “consceptic Cheongneology room and noise risk room in both sides” at a mining center, and applied for disability benefits to the Defendant on the part of the Plaintiff, who had the ability to work in the mining center.

B. Since then, the Plaintiff conducted a special medical examination at C Hospital upon the Defendant’s request, and at the time, the Plaintiff’s highest hearing capacity was measured by 40dB on the right side and 46dB on the left side.

However, on November 15, 2018, the Defendant decided the disability grade No. 14 (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff only on the left-hand hearing, on the ground that “the noise noise level is not relevant to work,” and “the right-hand hearing power is insufficient in light of the fact that the Plaintiff met the criteria for recognition of noise exposure, is exposed to strong occupational noise for about 23 years, and the results of the special diagnosis (the left-hand 40dB loss, the 50dB loss on the left-hand side, and the 5mp observation from each of the 50dB test for the reaction of the Cheongsung-cerebr-cerebr-cerebr-cerebr-cerebr-Ma.”

C. On March 2, 2020, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit against the instant disposition. On March 2, 2020, when the instant lawsuit was pending, the Defendant improved the Defendant’s noise risk assessment to “the purport of recognizing occupational diseases if the Defendant could not prove that the Defendant was in danger due to external causes, even if the cause of the instant lawsuit was mixed with the business and the cause of the instant accident, for more than three consecutive years,” and the Defendant notified the Plaintiff to re-determine whether to pay disability benefits by applying a new standard when the application is filed with respect to a case for which the determination of disability benefit site level was completed prior to the implementation of the revised standards for work performance as the Plaintiff.

Accordingly, on March 9, 2017, the plaintiff applied for disability benefits again to the defendant, attaching a written diagnosis of disability of B B B B non-humanism, and the defendant again requested the Korea Workers' Compensation and Welfare Service to assess the business relevance of the plaintiff's office.