Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

A. On April 14, 2016, while working as an employee of the Company B, the Plaintiff received medical care approval from the Defendant on September 8, 2017 with respect to “damage to the pressure of the satisfaction of the face” (hereinafter “damage to the pressure of the face”) on the part of the Defendant, while having him/her work at the workplace and having him/her work at the workplace (hereinafter “instant accident”).

B. On July 15, 2019, the Plaintiff filed an additional medical care application with the Defendant for the treatment of the injury and disease at issue, along with an additional injury and injury application as to the “saloneum salone and salone salone salone salone (math)” (hereinafter “the instant injury and disease”).

C. On August 12, 2019, the Defendant rendered a decision not to approve the Plaintiff’s above application on the ground that there is no proximate causal relation between the first accident and the previous approval branch (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 6, Eul evidence 1 (including a tentative number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the injury or disease of this case occurred between the instant accident and the Plaintiff’s continuous occupational burden, so proximate causal relation is acknowledged between the instant injury and the instant accident.

Nevertheless, the instant disposition was unlawful on a different premise.

B. Determination 1) Under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act, an additional injury or disease caused by an occupational accident is additionally discovered and requires medical care, or a new disease is caused by an injury or disease caused by the occupational accident and requires medical care. In such cases, the causal relationship between an injury or disease caused by an occupational accident or the existing accident and an additional injury or disease must be proved by the assertion. 2) As to this case, the results of the examination of medical records entrusted to the Director of the Medical Appraisal Board of the Association of this Court.