beta
(영문) 광주지방법원 2018.12.13 2018구단1049

휴업급여 일부 부지급처분취소

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 July 18, 2015, the Plaintiff is an employee belonging to the KCABD Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “foreign company”), and was diagnosed as a result of the instant accident (hereinafter referred to as the “instant accident”) by going beyond the fence-type fence to the outside of the night-type fence in order to view the divers of the instant accident at around the night-round night-round night-round night-round night-round night-round time-round time-round time-round July 18, 2015, with the left hand on the top of the cut gate, and was diagnosed as an accident (hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”).

B. The Plaintiff, following an administrative litigation, recognized the instant accident as an occupational accident on May 29, 2017, and claimed temporary layoff benefits against the Defendant for the period from July 19, 2015 to February 24, 2016.

C. As to this, the Defendant shall pay temporary layoff benefits for the period from July 19, 2015 to October 31, 2015 during the period of the claim on June 13, 2017, and the Defendant shall pay temporary layoff benefits for the period from November 1, 2015 to October 31, 2015, and only make the payment of temporary layoff benefits on the date of actual receipt of treatment (three days) during the period from November 1, 2015 to February 24, 2016, according to a medical opinion that the treatment is available during the period of employment.

D) The Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit on the same ground, which was dismissed on the grounds that the Plaintiff filed the petition for review and reexamination. [In the event that there was no dispute over the grounds for recognition, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit (Article 1, 2, 1, 2, 1, 2, 4, and 1, 1, 2, and 4).

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the Defendant’s refusal of medical care had led to a very economic difficulty because the Plaintiff was unable to perform his/her work without any compensation for at least two years from July 19, 2015 to May 29, 2017, and thus, the Plaintiff was unable to receive medical care during the period from November 1, 2015 to February 24, 2016, and is not able to receive medical care for the above period as the Defendant’s assertion.