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

A. On May 10, 2006, the Plaintiff, who was enrolled in B Research Institute (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) and worked as the responsible research institute, was diagnosed as cerebral typhism (hereinafter “cerebral typhism”) upon the Plaintiff’s birth at home around 04:00 on September 7, 2013.

B. On January 17, 2014, the Plaintiff asserted that the instant injury was caused by occupational and stress, and filed an application for medical care for the instant injury to the Defendant. However, on March 14, 2014, the Defendant rejected the application for medical care on the ground that “it is difficult to recognize a proximate causal relation with the instant injury on the grounds that the Plaintiff was a career researcher who was confirmed the instant injury, but worked in the company for about seven years and four months in the company, and whose business strength appears to be similar to that of the relevant researchers. The Plaintiff did not confirm the burden factor, such as immediately before and after the outbreak, transfer, sudden change in the business environment to a degree that may have significant influence on the normal functions of the brain banks, or that he was engaged in occupational stress and excessive extension.”

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). / [Grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion as a responsible research institute has been in charge of important tasks, such as the progress of the experiment and the preparation of a research plan, and the establishment of a research direction. On October 1, 2013, the Plaintiff completed the report by October 1, 2013, and completed the report by September 2013, so there was a lot of tasks to undergo the above task evaluation, and there was a lack of research time due to the lack of time to make preparation for the business trip because there was a lot of tasks to conduct the business trip compared to other ties, and the Plaintiff has participated in the planning of new tasks to secure research funds in the future.