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

A. On April 27, 2008, the Plaintiff was crashed at a height of 3 meters, and damaged the scale reception. Accordingly, the Plaintiff received medical care benefits under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act by June 28, 2009, and claimed disability benefits to the Defendant after receiving the medical care benefits under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act, “No. 1 (e.g., e., the e., the e., the e., the e., the e., the e., the e., the e., the e., the e., the e., the e., the e., the e., the e., the e., the e., the e

B. The Defendant determined the Plaintiff’s disability grade No. 15 (a person whose remaining labor service is limited to a considerable degree of harm to the function or mental function of the new system) but, at the request stage of the examination, determined the Plaintiff’s disability grade No. 7 subparag. 4 (a person whose disability remains less than a degree of 1/2 of the Plaintiff’s labor ability) (a person whose disability grade remains less than a degree of harm to the function or mental function of the new system).

C. On November 27, 2014, the Plaintiff applied for a re-determination of a disability grade. On March 17, 2015, the Defendant rendered a decision to maintain the Plaintiff’s disability grade under class 7 Subparagraph 4 at the same level as the previous one (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

The Plaintiff, who is dissatisfied with the instant disposition, filed a request for examination and a request for reexamination, but all dismissed.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 5, Eul 1 through 3, 5, 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. Since the Plaintiff’s mining function of the Plaintiff’s assertion is entirely lost, it constitutes class 3 of the disability grade under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act.

Therefore, the defendant's disposition of this case made on a different premise is unlawful.

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;

(c) fact - It is possible to store up to 300 cc within the Plaintiff’s mine, but the storage function is lost, and it is a state in which a person can not receive urine due to urology of urology at present.

- The plaintiff can not receive urology with her own ability, and 6,000 per day.