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 April 21, 1995, the Plaintiff, who was employed as a second engineer as a captain of B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “B”), was on duty in a viewing team (department in charge of auxiliary machinery), and was on duty as the chief engineer from March 1, 2007 (department in charge of main machinery).

B. Around 10:00 on April 27, 201, the Plaintiff was killed and transferred to the emergency room of the White Hospital. As a result, the Plaintiff was diagnosed with brain cerebral chronological chronological chronological chronchising, and was hospitalized until May 20, 201, and received hospital treatment.

C. After that, the Plaintiff filed an application for reinstatement to B with the permission of the president of the intra-company Council, and returned to work as a member of the other Ban, not the head of the main base, who was originally on July 27, 2011.

From September 26, 2011 to September 28, 2011, the Plaintiff was diagnosed on September 28, 2011 that the status of the Plaintiff’s own health has rapidly deteriorated, and was diagnosed as the second cerebral typology at the Sava Hospital on September 29, 201, and was transferred to the Yangsan National University Hospital, and was hospitalized upon the diagnosis of the “cerebral cerebral cerebral cerebral chron and the heart dynamic in the area of the Yangsan National University Hospital.”

E. After that, the Plaintiff received the diagnosis of the infection in the flag board, and undergone the flaging surgery on October 4, 201. On October 13, 2011, the Plaintiff filed an application for medical care benefits to the Defendant with respect to “the flag infection in brain, cerebrovascular, cerebrovascular, and cerebrovascular (hereinafter “the flag disease in this case”) during the process of an emergency operation after the detection of the flag infection in the left side flag, flag, and flag.

F. On February 19, 2013, the Defendant rendered a decision not to approve the Plaintiff’s application for medical care benefits (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that there is no proximate causal relation between the Plaintiff and his duties.

[Ground of recognition] A.