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

A. On April 21, 2014, while working at the construction site on April 21, 2014, the Plaintiff: (a) felled into the sloping of the sloping; (b) was subject to the sloping of the bones of the grandchildren; and (c) the bones of the bones of the snives of the grandchildren; and (d) took place on April 23, 2014; (b) was subject to the sporadic refining, scrap, and steel lines; and (c) was subject to the sporadic removal notice in 2015; and (d) immediately applied for registration of a disability to the Defendant on June 1, 2015.

B. On July 1, 2015, the Defendant rendered a decision on the disposition outside the disability grade (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff’s lowest standard of disability was reduced by at least 50% of the exercise scope of the part of the Plaintiff’s part of the Plaintiff’s part of the part of the Plaintiff’s part of the part of the Plaintiff’s part of the part of the Plaintiff’s part of the hand, and that there is no tolerance and building opinion to the Plaintiff’s part of the left part of

C. Although the Plaintiff filed an objection, he/she was determined on July 30, 2015 by taking a disposition other than a disability grade, and again filed an administrative appeal, but was dismissed on January 19, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The Plaintiff has 50% or more of its physical function as a grandchild.

On a different premise, there is a defect that misleads the fact of the instant disposition.

나. 가사 원고의 손목의 운동기능이 50% 이상 감소되지 않았다고 하더라도, 장애인복지법 제2조 제2항에 따라 장애인복지법 시행령 제2조 제1항 [별표 1] 제1의 가항에는 '한 팔의 기능에 영속적인 장애가 있는 사람“을 지체장애인으로 규정하고 있는데, 장애인복지법 시행규칙 제2조 제1항 [별표 1] 제1의 나항에는 ”손목관절 중 어느 한 관절의 기능에 상당한 장애가 있는 사람“이라고 규정하여, 시행령에 규정된 《영속적인 장애》를 《상당한 장애》로 제한하고 있고, 보건복지부고시 장애등급판정기준은 ”손목 관절 중 한 관절의 운동범위가 50% 이상 감소한...