요양급여부지급처분취소
1. On May 6, 2013, the Defendant revoked the disposition of non-approval of medical care benefits rendered to the Plaintiff.
2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On May 11, 2008, the Plaintiff joined a limited liability company B (hereinafter “instant company”) located in the former city as of May 11, 2008 and served as an accounting director.
B. On February 17, 201, at around 08:45, the Plaintiff was diagnosed as having been transferred to C Hospital and was diagnosed as having cerebrovascular while attending the company at the same time.
C. On May 17, 2011, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for medical care benefits for cerebrovascular, but the Defendant, on July 18, 201, acknowledged non-approval of medical care applied by the Plaintiff based on the result of the Determination of the Committee on Decision of the Occupational Disease in Gwangju District, stating that “The work content, work period, work environment, advisory opinion, etc. of the instant injury is not verified as a result of the review of the work content, work experience, and stress likely to cause the injury or disease in the ordinary course of work, and that proximate causal relation is not recognized with the work of the instant injury or disease.
(hereinafter “Prior Disposition”) D.
The Plaintiff filed a petition for review against the Defendant for revocation of the prior disposition of the instant case, but received a dismissal decision on November 201 on the above petition. The Plaintiff filed a petition for review to the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Reexamination Committee, but was dismissed on April 6, 2012.
E. On May 3, 2013, the Plaintiff again filed an application with the Defendant for medical care benefits related to cerebrovascular, right paralysis, and serum dementia (hereinafter “the instant application”). However, on May 6, 2013, the Defendant filed an application for medical care with the Plaintiff on May 6, 2013, according to the outcome of the Determination by the Committee on the Determination of the Occupational Disease in the Gwangju Regional Determination of the Medical Disease in which “The Defendant is deemed not to have confirmed any occupational course or stress likely to cause the instant injury, and that there is no proximate causal relation with the instant injury, as a result of examining the content of the work, the period of work, the environment, the opinion of advisory doctors, etc., and thus, there is no proximate causal relation with the instant injury.”