1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

Basic Facts

On October 28, 201, while serving as an employee belonging to the subsidiary metal company (hereinafter “instant workplace”), the Plaintiff was diagnosed as “a able to perform the surgery” (hereinafter “the instant injury and disease”), and received medical care until September 17, 2012, by means of the diagnosis of “a able to perform able to perform the surgery of closing the entropical bones, the gale of the lived bones, the lives of the lives, the lives of the lives, and the lives of the lives.e., the lives.

In the process, on August 24, 2012, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the purport that the Plaintiff’s medical institution’s medical treatment plan was approved as it is and that the treatment period should be the scheduled treatment period until September 17, 2012.

(hereinafter “The first notification”). After that, the Plaintiff filed an application for additional medical care with the Defendant, and subsequently received additional medical care for the instant injury and disease from February 17, 2013 to January 9, 2014, following the Defendant’s non-approval disposition and the revocation decision in the petition for review.

In the process, on December 9, 2013, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the purport that the Plaintiff’s medical institution’s medical treatment plan was approved as it is and that the treatment period should be the scheduled treatment period until January 9, 2014.

(hereinafter referred to as “the second notification of this case”). [Grounds for recognition] : (a) there is no dispute; (b) entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3; (c) Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 3, and 5 (including partial number of evidence; hereinafter the same shall apply); and (c) the overall purport of the pleading; and (d) the Defendant filed a claim against the plaintiff for the legality of the lawsuit of this case, which was the first notification of this case; and (c) the second notification of this case, issued a disposition of termination

However, since from the completion of the first medical care to the present time the symptoms of the injury and disease in this case continue to exist and the need to continue medical treatment exists, the Plaintiff’s first medical care closure disposition and the second medical care termination disposition itself should be revoked as it is unfair and unlawful.

Judgment

Generally, administrative disposition, which is subject to appeal litigation, is an act of public law of an administrative agency with regard to specific matters under laws and regulations.