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 May 24, 2013, while the Plaintiff (B) was serving as Crails drivers on May 24, 2013, the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant approved disease”) suffered from the injury of the pelke, the left-hand plebing, the left-hand plebing, the lower-hand plebing of the instant accident, and the base of the water control, and the reflections, both of which were damaged by the pelke, the pelke, the left-hand plebing of the instant accident, the lower-hand plebing of the instant accident (hereinafter “instant approved disease”), and the injury of the pelke, the lower-hand pellet, the lower-hand pelfing of the instant case, the lower-hand pelfing of the instant case, and the injury of the pelke during the course of receiving the approval for an occupational accident.

B. On December 12, 2013 during the period of the above medical care, the Plaintiff applied for an additional injury to the Defendant, while suffering from the instant accident on December 12, 2013 (No. 5-6 in the course of the instant medical care). However, the Defendant rendered a decision not to approve the said injury.

The plaintiff filed an administrative litigation seeking revocation of the above disposition.

The first instance court (Seoul District Court Decision 2014Gudan537, May 20, 2015) ruled against the Plaintiff to the effect that “it is difficult to deem that the above injury was caused due to the instant accident or approved injury, considering the following: (a) the Plaintiff’s failure to verify the damage to water, and considering the fact that it is deemed that the satise change is unrelated to credit because of the change in the satise of side signboards and spine vert; and (b) the said judgment became final and conclusive through the appellate court (Supreme Court Decision 2015Nu21537, Sept. 21, 2016).

(hereinafter referred to as the “transfer lawsuit”) the first instance court and the appellate court.

The Plaintiff completed medical care until December 31, 2013 due to the instant approved injury and disease, and was judged as a disability grade by applying mutatis mutandis the sum of class 15 of class 12 and class 15 of class 12 and class 15 of the right side (persons remaining after the aftermath of the relevant approved injury and disease) of class 11 to the left side.

On October 27, 2016, the Plaintiff again submitted to the Defendant the instant case “M50.0” (M50.0) No. 5-6 of the Radal Radal Radal Madal Radal damage (S14.1A) to the Defendant.