2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

A. The Plaintiff filed a claim for disability benefits by January 12, 2012 due to occupational accidents that occurred on January 6, 2009, along with a medical examination report. The Defendant decided that the Plaintiff would increase the disability grade according to the industrial accident compensation insurance advisory opinion and the disability benefit agreement (a person whose snow is real name and the eyesight of other snow is less than 0.02).

B. However, as a result of the investigation by the defendant, the plaintiff is found to fall under subparagraph 1 of grade 8 (person whose inner eye or the visual eye of one eye is less than 0.02 meters) due to the fact that the plaintiff was determined as a disability grade 4 (in the case of the shore, the eurgical eurgical eurgical eurgic eurgic eurgic eurgic eurgic eurgic eurgic eurgic eurgic eurgic eurgic eurgic eurgic eurgic eurgic eurgic eurgic eurgic eurgic eurgic eurgic eurgic eur

C. Accordingly, on June 23, 2017, the Defendant, while knowing that the Plaintiff does not fall under class 2 of disability at the time when the disability grade was determined, determined that the Plaintiff’s receipt of total amount of disability pension KRW 78,60,910 [15,06,680 (it shall be from March 1, 2012 to February 28, 2014) and monthly pension KRW 63,546,230 (it shall be from March 1, 2012 to December 31, 2016) (it shall be deemed that the Plaintiff’s receipt of disability pension KRW 63,546,230 (it shall be corrected from class 2 to class 81, and the disability grade shall be adjusted to class 8 to class 495,163,040, 37,4870, 780, 410, 4710, 47, 4816, 47,”

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 9, Eul evidence 1 to 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion is accompanied by a written opinion of the first diagnosis.