장해등급결정처분취소
1. The Defendant’s disposition of determining a disability grade against the Plaintiff on November 2, 2012 is revoked.
2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.
1. Details of the instant disposition
A. On January 12, 2012, at around 08:40, the Plaintiff filed an application for medical care benefits with the Defendant on the ground that he/she received “the instant injury and disease” (hereinafter referred to as “instant injury and disease”) at a height of 1.2 meters at a height of 1.2 meters from the time of removing the walls of the first floor of the hotel for each hotel located in Cheongju-si.
B. The Defendant: (a) although it is deemed that there is a proximate causal link with the disaster, the Defendant rendered a disposition not to approve part of the medical care, on the ground that there is no proximate causal link with the disaster on the ground that the diversology was confirmed on the part of the slives of the slives in the slives of the slives of the slives and the slives of the side of the
C. As to this, the Plaintiff filed a request for review with the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Review Committee, but the request for review was rejected, and again filed a request for review with the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Review Committee, and the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Review Committee revoked the Defendant’s partial approval of medical care on the ground that there was a proximate causal link between the work and the work.
Accordingly, on October 24, 2012, the Plaintiff was receiving medical treatment for the instant injury and closed medical treatment, and thereafter filed a claim for disability benefits. On November 2, 2012, the Defendant determined the disability grade as class No. 14 subparag. 10 (hereinafter “instant disposition”) (hereinafter “the instant disposition”) by determining that the Plaintiff’s disability grade remains as a general East with the Plaintiff on Nov. 2, 2012.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination on the legitimacy of the instant disposition
A. The plaintiff's assertion currently shows symptoms, such as the fall-off of bridge, etc. due to the disease of this case, which may hinder labor.