장해등급결정처분취소
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 April 10, 2006, the Plaintiff entered and worked for the non-party LABS Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “non-party company”) and entered the non-party LABS Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “non-party company”). On February 16, 2009, the Plaintiff caused “brain color, self-explosional cerebral cerebral cerebriform, and cerebral cerebral eption (hereinafter “the instant injury”).
B. On August 11, 201, the Plaintiff obtained approval of the instant injury and received medical care until August 11, 201, and filed a claim for disability benefits with the Defendant. On August 18, 2011, the Defendant determined the Plaintiff’s disability grade No. 7 subparag. 4 (the Plaintiff’s disability grade remains as a person who does not engage in an easy work with the function or mental function of the relevant injury).
C. After that, the Plaintiff applied for the re-determination of a disability grade around November 20, 2013, but the Defendant rendered the instant disposition against the Plaintiff on March 5, 2014, which determined the Plaintiff’s disability grade as class 7-4 as the same grade as that of the previous case.
[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, 2, 3, 7 (including additional number), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The plaintiff's assertion shows that the current status of the plaintiff's present high-level suppression disorder, implementation, and practical behavior, and the phenomenon of personal shock change, such as a sense of appraisal, a sense of bathing, and a sense of sense of view. The plaintiff's ability is considerably low and sense of sense, and it has been severely damaged, and the function of friendly body is too weak.
As such, the Plaintiff is merely engaged in an incomplete act for survival with another person’s aid and is unable to perform his/her labor at all. Thus, the Plaintiff’s disability grade 3 subparag. 3 falls under “a person who is unable to engage in lifelong labor during his/her lifetime” or “a person who is not able to engage in a serious impediment to the function or mental function of the neurotic system except where he/she has a obvious obstacle to the function or mental function of the neurotic system,” but on the premise that it is possible to engage in an easy labor.