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

A. The Plaintiff is a person who had engaged in construction design and administrative work as an employee of the “General Certified architect Office B” (the business owner: C; hereinafter “instant architect office”).

B. On March 9, 2016, the Plaintiff was used in currency within the office of the architect office of this case and was escorted to a medical institution by the 119 Emergency Rescue Team, and filed an application for medical care benefits with the Defendant. However, on August 16, 2016, the Defendant examined all of the Plaintiff’s age, physical conditions, developments, working environment, working hours, work hours, past soldiers’ history, medical records, video medical records, etc. as to the Plaintiff on August 16, 2016, and determined that the instant injury was confirmed based on video medical records, such as BT, but the Plaintiff was performing planning and administrative work on October 12, 2012, and the Plaintiff did not have any special occupational burden (i.e., rapid change of working environment, sudden increase in work volume, excessive stress, etc.) to the extent that it could cause cardio-cerebrial disease under the performance of its duties prior to the Plaintiff’s outbreak, and thus, the Defendant did not have any causal relation with the Plaintiff’s personal disease as a result of deliberation.

C. The Plaintiff appealed and filed a request for reexamination, but was dismissed.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 6 evidence, Eul evidence 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. At the time of the occurrence of the instant injury to the Plaintiff’s summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Plaintiff’s amendment to the architectural design for the 12th floor officetels located D in Hysung-si (hereinafter “instant officetel”) was deferred on a yearly basis at the eternic City.