장해등급결정처분취소
1. The Defendant’s disposition of determining a disability grade against the Plaintiff on November 21, 2018 shall be revoked.
2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. From June 1, 1962 to July 3, 1971, the Plaintiff worked as the digging field in the Korea Coal Corporation Korea Coal Corporation from the Korea Coal Corporation to the Korea Coal Corporation.
B. On July 30, 2010, the Plaintiff was diagnosed as the “Nechopathic chronological chronology test” after having undergone a positive chronology test on one occasion by a member of the Malithic Malithic Malithic Malithic Malith
C. After that, on June 15, 2015, the Plaintiff was diagnosed by the aforementioned B B B B B B as “hnenenenene dney dney, and claimed disability benefits to the Defendant on July 7, 2015.
On August 17, 2015, the Defendant filed a claim for disability benefits with the Plaintiff on July 7, 2015, on the ground that “The right to claim disability benefits has expired after the lapse of a long period of time from the noise business place on July 4, 1971, and the said right to claim disability benefits has expired.”
E. The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the above disposition and filed a request for review and reexamination. However, the Plaintiff’s request for review and reexamination was dismissed, on the ground that “The Plaintiff was diagnosed as a “nurient dialogic scarcity” on July 30, 2010 in the disability diagnosis report and the medical record on July 30, 2010, since three years have elapsed since the date of leaving the noise business place and the date of the first diagnosis, the extinctive prescription of the right to claim disability benefits was completed, and it is difficult to recognize a proximate causal relationship between the Plaintiff’s difficult business and the noise business place.”
F. Accordingly, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking the revocation of the above disposition with this court 2016Gudan6466, and this court is reasonable to deem that “the Plaintiff’s spacific crutal crutty falls under the Plaintiff’s noise noise from the mine for a considerable period of time due to the noise in the mine or that the elderly’s crut crut crut crut was in the state of the present state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the natural progress due to the noise from the noise in the mine for a considerable period of time. Therefore,
And the plaintiff.