추가상병및재요양급여불승인처분취소
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, citing the reasoning of the judgment, is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for changing the 3rd to 5th to 3rd to 5th to 11th of the grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance, and therefore, citing it in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article
Change Parts
B. (1) According to Article 49 of the Industrial Accident Compensation Guarantee Act, an application for approval of an additional injury or disease applies for medical care to a new injury or disease after receiving a decision of approval of the first injury or disease due to an occupational accident. The causal relationship between the occupational accident or the first injury or the first injury or disease incurred by the injury or the first injury or disease should be recognized. In such a case, the causal relationship among them should be proved by the assertion.
(B) Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in the statement of Nos. 7, 11, and 20 with respect to the instant case, the Plaintiff was subject to the diagnosis by the hospital of the Republic of Korea on Oct. 21 of the same year on the following: (a) on September 18, 1998, the Plaintiff received the diagnosis by the hospital of the Republic of Korea National University from Sep. 18 to Oct. 22 of the same year on the following: (b) on the hospital of the Republic of Korea: (c) on the hospital of the Republic of Korea, the Plaintiff received the diagnosis of the “the Mali-Mali-Mai Mai Mai Mai Mai Mai Mai Mai Mai Mai Mai Mai Mai Mai Mai Mai Mai Mai Mai Mai Mai Mai Mai Mai Mai Mai Mai Mai Mai Mai Ma; and (hereinafter “Mai Mai Mai Mai Mai Mai Mai Mai Mai Mai Mai Mai Mai Mai Mai Mai.
However, in light of the following circumstances, Gap evidence Nos. 2, 7, and 17 and Eul evidence Nos. 1, 4, 5, 6, 9, and 10, and the overall purport of the arguments as to the result of the request for appraisal of medical records to the president of the Korean Medical Association of the first instance court.