장해급여부지급처분취소 청구
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On October 2015, the Plaintiff was diagnosed as “hymological dystrophal dystrophism, both sides of the noise level pansism,” at the National Institute of B B B Sponism.
B. On March 22, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a claim for disability benefits against the Defendant on the ground that “the Plaintiff’s period of working at the noise workplace is less than one year and eight months, and considering the noise exposure period, the noise exposure suspension period, the age, etc., the Plaintiff’s inception appears to be old when considering the noise exposure period, the noise exposure suspension period, the age, etc., the Plaintiff’s inception of disability benefits (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
[Judgment of the court below] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff continued to be exposed to noise while working in Ctane, etc. for twenty (20) years, and due to this, the Plaintiff’s allegation occurred.
Therefore, the instant disposition issued on a different premise should be revoked as it is unlawful.
B. In light of the following circumstances, which can show the overall purport of the pleadings in the statement Nos. 1 and 4, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to acknowledge the existence of proximate causal relationship between the occurrence of the hearing and the Plaintiff’s work, and there is no evidence to acknowledge otherwise.
According to Article 34(3) [Attachment 3] of the Enforcement Decree of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act, which sets the specific criteria for recognition of occupational diseases pursuant to delegation of Article 37(3) of the former Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act (amended by Act No. 14933, Oct. 24, 2017), in order to be recognized as noise distress, it is required to be exposed to more than 85dB for more than three consecutive years.
However, on April 1, 1987, the plaintiff was employed by the digging division in Ctan mine, but he was suffering from an occupational accident on December 9, 1988.