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

A. While working in B mining center, the Plaintiff obtained approval from the Defendant for the first medical care to September 30, 1997 for the injury and disease of the injury and disease caused by the occupational accident occurred on April 17, 191, and concluded the medical care for the injury and disease during the period from May 7, 2012 to December 29, 2012.

B. On the other hand, on December 10, 2012, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for the approval of additional injury and disease with respect to “the instant injury and disease” (hereinafter “instant injury and disease”). On May 8, 2017, the Plaintiff received a decision to approve the instant injury and disease from the Defendant, and on May 25, 2017, filed a claim for temporary disability compensation benefits against the Defendant for the period from December 30 to May 25, 2017 (hereinafter “instant request period”).

C. On May 26, 2017, the Defendant determined that the symptoms of the instant injury and disease are fixed after October 24, 2015, according to the review opinions by the panel of advisory doctors, and decided to pay temporary layoff benefits only to the Plaintiff during the period from December 30, 2012 to October 24, 2015 (hereinafter “instant disposition”). D.

The plaintiff filed a request for examination against this, but the request for examination was dismissed on November 28, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, and 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Plaintiff continued to provide active treatment to the injury and disease of this case during the period of request, and thus, the Plaintiff should be paid temporary disability compensation benefits in light of the entire period of request for the instant case’s medical care.

Therefore, on a different premise, some of the period of request in this case.