1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Details of the disposition

On December 23, 2010, the Plaintiff was diagnosed as an occupational accident (hereinafter “the instant accident”) caused by the destruction of asbestos slate from the roof reinforcement work at the construction site of the livestock shed on December 23, 2010, and was diagnosed as “the first approved disease” (hereinafter referred to as “the first approved disease”). The Plaintiff was diagnosed as a duplicating duplicating, breast-frighting, suplicating, suplicating, suplicating, suplicating, suplicating, suplicating, suplicating, suplicating, suplicating, suplicating, suplicating, suplicating, suplicating, and functional exercise disorder in both sides, duplicating, suplicating, suplicating, suplicating, and functional exercise disorder.

The Plaintiff received medical treatment from the Defendant until March 21, 2013 with the first approved injury and disease, and received a judgment of class 5 No. 8 of the disability grade on the ground that the Plaintiff was recognized as a person who could not have any significant trouble in the function of the neurosis after the completion of the medical treatment, unless he/she has any particular obvious trouble.

On July 12, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an application for additional medical care with respect to the Defendant, “damage to the horse gun and the First Tuescopsis” (hereinafter “the injury to the horse gun”), and the Defendant filed an application for additional medical care with respect to the “the escape certificate of the external trauma rescopsis of the 5th century” (hereinafter “the escape certificate of the external trauma rescopsis of the 1st century”), but the Defendant issued a disposition that all of them approved on September 4, 2013 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

In response to the instant disposition, the Plaintiff filed a request for examination with the Defendant, but was dismissed on December 2013, and the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Review Committee filed a request for reexamination, but was dismissed on May 23, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Eul's statements as to Eul's evidence Nos. 1 through 5, and the purport of the entire argument as to the legitimacy of the disposition of this case, the plaintiff's assertion as to whether the disposition of this case is legitimate, shall continue to be serious pain and walking, and urine impediment, etc. even after the completion