beta
(영문) 인천지방법원 2016.01.26 2015구단957

요양급여신청불승인취소

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On December 1, 1989, the Plaintiff entered a company B (hereinafter referred to as “non-party company”) that runs the business of manufacturing pipes, manufacturing, processing, and selling construction pipes, and entered the division of business, while the Plaintiff entered the corporate register of the non-party company as the representative director of the non-party company from September 23, 199 to October 1, 2003; 2 from March 26, 2007 to September 27, 2012.

As a result, it has been in charge of business management.

B. On June 4, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application for medical care benefits with the Defendant on December 24, 2014, asserting that the instant injury and disease constituted an occupational or stress disease after receiving the diagnosis of “urine” (hereinafter “urine and disease”).

C. On May 12, 2015, the Defendant rendered a disposition not to grant medical care (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that it is difficult to recognize a proximate causal relation with the instant branch’s work.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 12, Eul 1's each entry, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff caused a legal dispute between the non-party company and the association established for the purpose of carrying out the above business (hereinafter “non-party company”) from the beginning of early 2013, when multiple employees were forced to move to the non-party company due to a regional urban development project in the zone where the non-party company was located, and the duty performed by the retired employee was handled as well as the Plaintiff’s original duties during the day, and at night, the occupational division and stress caused by the stress were accumulated over a long time while carrying out the company guard business.

Therefore, even though the injury or disease of this case was caused by excessive work or stress of the plaintiff, the disposition of this case is unlawful.

B. Determination 1.