1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. On April 28, 2014, the Defendant issued a disposition of non-approval for an additional injury or disease against the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. At around 08:20 on September 14, 201, the Plaintiff was an employee employed by Dongcheon Power Co., Ltd., and was performing the work of cutting down trees by using a kack rolling stock vehicle (second strings), and was under medical care with the Defendant’s approval, such as “the instant accident (hereinafter “the instant accident”), which was caused by an accident that fell from approximately 1.4m high at a level of approximately KRW 1.4m, such as a 300 g weight, etc., cut down from the 1.4m weight, etc. (hereinafter “the instant accident”). The Plaintiff was under medical care with the Defendant’s approval.

B. On March 7, 2012, the Plaintiff filed an additional injury and disease against the Defendant, alleging that the “savinal salt spons, No. 4, and No. 5” occurred due to the instant accident.

C. On March 19, 2012, the Defendant approved the Plaintiff to receive medical care with respect to the “definite salt,” and issued a disposition not to grant medical care with respect to the “profinite 4 and 5 (hereinafter “existing Additional Injury and Disease”). D.

The Plaintiff filed a request for an examination of the previous disposition against an existing additional injury or disease, but the said request was dismissed on May 30, 2012.

E. Accordingly, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking revocation of the previous disposition with the Seoul Administrative Court 2012Gudan16278, and the said court rendered a judgment on April 12, 2013 that “the previous disposition is revoked.”

F. The Defendant dissatisfied with the above judgment and appealed as Seoul High Court 2013Nu12845, and the above court rendered a judgment on April 10, 2014 on the ground that “The proximate causal relation between the instant accident and the existing additional injury and disease cannot be acknowledged (However, the Plaintiff’s escape certificate during the current 6-7 trends is likely to have a proximate causal relation with the instant accident, and the Plaintiff’s claim is dismissed.” The above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

G. The Plaintiff’s instant case around April 15, 2014.