1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On March 14, 2014, at around 09:00, the Plaintiff filed an application for medical care benefits with the Defendant, alleging that the Plaintiff caused an accident that knee knee knee knee knee knee kne kne kne knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knees on the left side

B. As to this, the Defendant rendered the instant disposition that did not grant medical care on the ground that there was no proximate causal link between the instant accident and the instant upper branch on the grounds that it is difficult to view that the “integrative fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral flu

C. The Plaintiff filed a request for reexamination, but was dismissed on January 16, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 2 and 4

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the instant accident occurred while cleaning the floor in the factory, and the Plaintiff did not have any other external cause that could cause the instant injury until the instant accident occurred. Thus, it is reasonable to view that the instant injury was caused by the instant accident, since the Plaintiff appealed to the left-hand knee-kne-kne-kne-kne-kne-kne-kne-kne-kne-kne-k

나. 판 단 갑 제3호증, 을 제3호증의 1, 2, 을 제4, 7호증의 각 기재 및 변론 전체의 취지를 종합하여 인정되는 다음과 같은 사정 즉, 원고는 이 사건 재해 이전인 2013. 10.경 2회에 걸쳐 무릎뼈 힘줄염, 상세불명의 다발관절염으로 진료 받은 적이 있는 점, 원고가 이 사건 재해 다음날인 2014. 3. 15. B병원에서 진료 받은 기록에 의하면...