1. The defendant's appeal and the plaintiff's incidental appeal are all dismissed.

2. Costs arising from an appeal and an incidental appeal shall be respectively.

The reasoning for this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except for the modification as follows. Thus, this case is quoted in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

[Revision] Part 8 of the judgment of the court of first instance is that "However, as seen earlier, the collection disposition of this case based on Article 84 (1) 3 of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act is lawful only in cases where it is strong enough to justify the latter by comparing and comparing the public interest needs to be achieved, and the disadvantages arising from the infringement such as the right to obtain benefits and the protection of trust that the plaintiff will suffer."

The judgment of the court of first instance is in a state of conduct 15 of Part 8, and the defendant can recover from disability benefits (or settlement) for both sides of the U.S., instead of forced collection of disability benefits that the plaintiff received from the plaintiff, the defendant can recover from disability benefits for both sides of the U.S. in the future.

Part 8 of the judgment of the first instance court, Part 20 through 9 are deemed to be "the collection disposition of this case is unlawful. Therefore, the collection disposition of this case must be revoked."

In conclusion, the judgment of the first instance court is legitimate, and the defendant's appeal and the plaintiff's incidental appeal are dismissed for each reason.