2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. On November 4, 2013, the Plaintiff, who had been engaged in dusty work as a mining department in the Korea Coal Corporation, etc., was diagnosed as a chronic closed disease (hereinafter “instant injury”), and applied for medical care benefits therefor to the Defendant on the diagnosis of the chronic closed disease (hereinafter “instant injury”).

B. On July 31, 2014, the Defendant rendered the instant disposition non-approval of medical care on the ground that the period of exposure to a dust is less than 6-7 years and the exposure level is less than 6-7 years, and the causal relationship between the instant injury branch and the instant injury branch is not recognized.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1-2, Eul evidence 4

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff asserted that he was employed by the lower company of the Korea Resources Agency at the age of 18 and worked as the post-industrial department for two years. The Plaintiff joined the Korea Resources Agency at the age of 20 and was engaged in coal and digging operations for four years.

Even after the removal, he worked for 7 to 8 years in the Soul Mining Center, etc., and was engaged in dusty work for a total of 15 years.

Therefore, the disposition of this case which did not approve the medical care by misunderstanding that the plaintiff's period of performing dusty work is only 6 to 7 years is unlawful.

B. The judgment is based on the following facts: (a) the Plaintiff engaged in coal and digging operations for four to five years at the coal mine center in the coal mine in the coal mines, and engaged in mining and transportation operations at the emulitic mining center in the coal mine in the coal mine in the coal mine in the Aminitic Industry Corporation for one year and eight months (from May 1, 1965 to December 31, 1966); (b) there is no dispute between the parties; (c) it is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff engaged in dusty work in addition to the descriptions in subparagraph 3-1 and 2 of the evidence No. 3-2, there is insufficient reason to recognize that the Plaintiff had been engaged in dusty work; (b) the degree of exposure to dust is very low compared to coal mines; and (c) the Plaintiff has smokeed for ten years until he reaches 30 years of age, and the smoking is highly related to the outbreak of chronic waste diseases.