Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

A. On April 23, 2018, the Plaintiff entered the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the “instant workplace”) and was engaged in the operation of the set-off season, around 06:20 on September 27, 2018, the Plaintiff was subject to the instant accident (hereinafter referred to as the “instant accident”). Around September 27, 2018, the Plaintiff was able to escape from the world to put clothes in personal things in order to move back to work uniforms in the set-off room of the instant workplace, while she was sleeped, while she was sleeped in the upper part of the vessel and she was slick in the upper part.

B. On October 23, 2018, the Plaintiff filed an application for medical care by asserting that the pertinent injury and disease was an occupational disease in relation to the duties performed at the instant workplace, and filed an application for medical care with the Defendant, claiming that the pertinent injury and disease was an occupational disease in relation to the duties performed at the instant workplace, and that the pertinent injury and disease had been diagnosed at the C Hospital immediately after the instant accident occurred.

On February 11, 2019, the Defendant approved the medical care for the lux and tension, and issued a non-approval disposition for medical care (hereinafter “non-approval disposition”) on the ground that it cannot be recognized as having a causal relation with his/her duties with respect to the escape of a conical signboard on upcoming 2-3 occasions in 2019.

(c)

On October 23, 2018, the Plaintiff received a diagnosis of the escape certificate of conical signboards (or urgency) and the escape certificate of conical signboards (hereinafter referred to as “each of the instant injury and disease”), and applied for medical care by asserting that each of the instant injury and disease was an occupational accident caused by the instant accident to the Defendant on March 13, 2019.

On March 27, 2019, the Defendant: (a) had a side signboard of the escape certificate between conical signboards No. 2-3 times; (b) however, it is difficult to view the escape certificate of conical signboards as acute because of no other shock pressure; and (c) it is difficult to recognize that the escape certificate of conical signboards No. 5-Taple No. 1 of the 2010 was in considerable relation with his/her duties due to the fact that it is difficult to recognize a considerable causal relationship with his/her duties due to a disc expansion. (d) Each of the instant dispositions (hereinafter “instant dispositions”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 3, Eul evidence Nos. 7-1 and 2, and all pleadings.