The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. In order to recognize the existence of a disease claimed by an employee as a premise for the recognition of occupational accidents under Article 5 subparag. 1 of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act (hereinafter “Industrial Accident Insurance Act”), the symptoms of workers verified by objective and reasonable methods, such as the result of appraisal, must conform to the generally accepted medical knowledge or diagnosis standards, and otherwise, barring any special circumstance, it is difficult to recognize the existence of a disease per se, barring special circumstances.

2.(a)

The court below acknowledged the following facts based on the evidence duly admitted:

1) From December 1981 to December 7, 1994, the Plaintiff worked as a mining source in B mining centers, C, and D companies, etc. (2) On March 29, 2016, the Plaintiff was diagnosed by Rano-Madon-gun, which was not accompanied by the leader (hereinafter “the instant injury”).

Based on this, the Plaintiff asserted to the Defendant that “the instant injury and disease occurred by performing for a long period of time the work involving vibration, such as driving a tool, such as landing rocks, while working as a light source in the coal mine for about 21 years,” and applied for medical care benefits.

3) On October 4, 2016, the Defendant rendered the instant disposition to not approve the Plaintiff’s medical care on the ground that “the instant injury and disease is not recognized, and there is no proximate causal relation between the Plaintiff’s performance work and the instant injury and disease after a considerable period of time has elapsed since the Defendant left the vibration exposure work.” 4) The first instance court entrusted the head of F Hospital with the Plaintiff’s physical examination, and the appraisal commission did not confirm the Plaintiff’s opinion.” The Plaintiff appears to have symptoms, such as “the Plaintiff did not confirm the intention of shotning in the cooling-water test,” and “the Plaintiff was showing that there was any symptoms, such as the color change of fingers, and the burden of depreciation, caused by the use of the vibration tools for the past twenty years.”