요양불승인처분취소
1. On May 25, 201, the Defendant revoked the disposition of non-approval for medical care granted to the Plaintiff.
2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. From March 4, 2011, the Plaintiff became a member of the U.S. Engineering Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “U.S.”), and was conducting the mixed equipment repair and the removal of factory equipment on March 16, 201, the Plaintiff was involved in an accident that, at around 09:00 on March 16, 201, he/she laid down the string and the string of the instant accident, he/she was able to sit down on the floor because the net shouldering for the left side is a string of the string (hereinafter “instant accident”).
B. On March 21, 201, at B Hospital after the instant accident, the Plaintiff was diagnosed as a fieldr rupture to the left-hand rupture, a fieldr to the left-hand rupture, the left-hand rupture, a supture, a supture, a supture, and dupture infection (hereinafter “the instant injury and disease”). On April 13, 201, the Plaintiff received rupture rupture and tupture rupture rupture.
C. On April 21, 201, the Plaintiff asserted that the instant injury and disease was an occupational accident to the Defendant and applied for medical care. D.
On May 25, 2011, the Defendant rendered a non-approval disposition (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that “In full view of the medical opinions, disaster circumstances, etc., the instant injury and disease was not recognized as having occurred due to his/her duties” (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
E. The Plaintiff filed a request for review, but the Defendant dismissed the request on November 201, 2013, on the ground that the Defendant’s “It is difficult to recognize the link with the instant accident by deeming that there was no direct shock in the check, and that there was no direct shock in the check,” and that it is difficult to recognize the proximate causal link with the instant accident, even if the Defendant engaged in the removal of machinery and equipment from the place of business of the Nonparty company for five days, at the place of business of the Nonparty company, while engaging in the removal of machinery
E. The Plaintiff re-written a request for reexamination, but the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Reexamination Committee dismissed it on March 9, 2012.
【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap 1 through 8, the purport of whole pleadings
2. The case.