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 September 29, 2014, while the Plaintiff was working at the construction site for the project for the improvement of the water purification system for the water purification plant located in the Hanan-gun, Gyeongnam-gun, the Plaintiff was in line with the border of the Dong-gu, Ansan-gu, the right side of which was in the process of sprinking the steel bars with the high speed cutting machine around 14:10 on September 29,

(hereinafter “instant disaster”). B.

As a result of the foregoing disaster, the Plaintiff was diagnosed by the Mashan-gu and Mash-gu image (hereinafter “the instant injury”) and received temporary layoff benefits from October 22, 2014 to November 10, 2014, as recognized by the Defendant as an occupational accident.

C. The Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for temporary layoff benefits from November 11, 2014 to December 17, 2014, which is the day following the payment date of the above temporary layoff benefits, but the Defendant, on December 18, 2014, determined that “the status of employment payment is recognized from November 11, 2014 to November 30, 2014, and thus, the Defendant paid temporary layoff benefits, and thereafter, paid benefits based on the number of days of actual Tongwons,” and notified the Plaintiff thereof.

In the above decision, the non-payment of temporary layoff benefits shall be referred to as the "disposition of this case".

(D) The Plaintiff filed a request for review with the Defendant on April 3, 2015, but the Defendant dismissed the Plaintiff’s request for review on April 3, 2015, and the Plaintiff re-requested to the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Reexamination Committee, but the said Committee dismissed the Plaintiff’s request for review on June 25, 2015. [In the absence of any dispute over the grounds for recognition, the entries in subparagraphs A through 5, B, and E, and the purport of the entire pleadings.]

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is not only during the period in which the Defendant was employed but also has been suffering from severe pains, shocks, etc. due to the instant injury and disease until now, and it is practically impossible to find a job because the Plaintiff was under hospital treatment once or every day.

Therefore, after November 30, 2014, temporary layoff benefits are provided on the premise that the plaintiff is in a usable state.