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

A. On February 28, 2012, the Plaintiff became a taxi driver and served as a taxi driver on February 28, 2012. On April 19, 2012, the Plaintiff was diagnosed as “cerebral cerebral cerebral cerebral cerebral cerebral cerebral cerebral cerebral Spon (hereinafter “the instant injury”) as a result of the Plaintiff’s visit to the Kansung Hospital due to the symptoms of lack of self-power during taxi driving on April 3:0, 2012. On May 7, 2012, the Plaintiff claimed occupational accidents and filed an application for medical care benefits with the Defendant.

B. On July 3, 2012, the Defendant issued a non-approval disposition (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that it was difficult to recognize any existing disease, such as high blood pressure, and any overwork or stress likely to cause the instant injury.

C. The Plaintiff appealed and filed a request for reexamination via a request for examination, but was dismissed by the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Reexamination Committee on March 7, 2013.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap Nos. 1, 4, 5, and the purport of the whole pleading

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The plaintiff's assertion is at least nine hours every month after the plaintiff's entry, and during the three days immediately preceding the outbreak of the disease of this case, 14 hours per average, and was in excess of 14 hours per month, and as a result, under a non-regular situation where stress on the observance of shift hours is seriously affected by the violation of the new wall signal signals on the date of the occurrence of the disease, and the injury of this case was raised more unexpectedly.

B. (1) The "occupational accident" under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act refers to the injury, disease, disability or death of an employee caused by an occupational reason, and in order to be recognized as a occupational accident, the accident is caused by the occupational accident, and there is a proximate causal relation between the work and the accident. In this case, the causal relation between the worker's accident and the work should be proved by the claimant.

The existence of causation is not the average person but the health and physical condition of the worker concerned.