장해급여부지급처분취소
1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. Plaintiff A served as C students from D Mining Complex from 1959 to 1968, and as a drainage hole from May 1968 to August 1971.
Plaintiff
B As E, from November 1, 1971 to September 1976, B served as FY and as Embane in the G Mining Corporation from August 1979 to September 1993.
B. On October 30, 2015, Plaintiff A was diagnosed as “niver noise panscopic panscopic panscopic panscopic panscopic panscopic panscopic panscopic panscopic panscopic panscopic panscopic panscopicscopic pansc
C. The Plaintiffs applied for disability benefits to the Defendant on the ground that “the noise was exposed to noise while working at the place of work causing long-term noise, which constitutes occupational disease.”
On December 14, 2016, the Defendant rendered a decision on disability benefit site pay (hereinafter “each of the instant dispositions”) to the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff B, respectively, on January 18, 2017, on the ground that “it is difficult to recognize the causal relationship between the Plaintiff’s office and the office.”
E. The Plaintiffs filed a petition for review against each of the instant dispositions, but the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Review Committee rendered a decision to dismiss each of the claims against the Plaintiff A on June 7, 2017, and the Plaintiff B on July 5, 2017.
F. The Plaintiffs were dissatisfied with the foregoing decision and filed a request for reexamination, but the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Reexamination Committee rendered a ruling to dismiss the request for reexamination against the Plaintiff A on November 3, 2017, and on December 1, 2017 against the Plaintiff B.
Plaintiff
A was served on December 14, 2017, and Plaintiff B on December 18, 2017.
【Ground for recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition, entries in Gap evidence 1 through 7 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The plaintiffs' assertion is at least 3 years of noise exceeding 85dB in succession while working in the mining center.