logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2014.04.25 2012구단2929
추가상병불승인처분취소
Text

1. On May 21, 2012, the Defendant’s revocation of the disposition of additional injury and disease approval against the Plaintiff.

2. The plaintiff's remainder.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On January 2, 2009, the Plaintiff entered the high-level advertising industry (hereinafter “non-party company”) and worked as a street cleaners on March 12, 2010, and applied for medical care for the Defendant on March 25, 2010, on the ground that, on March 12, 2010, the cleaning vehicle unloading from the cleaning vehicle and falling into the ice path, and the scam scam in the rain removal around 07:00 of the same month, on the 13th day of the same month, the Plaintiff removed scam for the reason that the symptoms have deteriorated (hereinafter “the disaster in this case”). On April 14, 2010, the Defendant applied for medical care for the Defendant on March 25, 2010, and applied for the approval of the scam 2-4 (hereinafter “the scam scam-4”) and the scam scam of the above application.

B. On April 18, 2012, the Plaintiff received a diagnosis of “the 3-4 Es. 3-4 Es. 1 and applied for an additional injury to the Defendant.” However, on May 21, 2012, the Defendant issued a non-approval disposition for the Plaintiff on the ground that the 1st additional injury to the Plaintiff is irrelevant to the first one, and that the 1st injury to the Plaintiff is irrelevant to the first one, and is a chronic one (hereinafter “instant 1 disposition”).

C. In addition, on May 18, 2012, the Plaintiff filed an additional injury and disease application with the Defendant upon the diagnosis of the “HH No. 3-4” (hereinafter “Additional Injury and Disease No. 2”), but on June 22, 2012, the Defendant rendered the instant second disposition against the Plaintiff on the ground that the previous opinion was not confirmed in MRI on March 4, 201, and that there was no causal relation with the first accident.

(1) 【No dispute over the grounds for recognition, Gap evidence Nos. 1 to 3, Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff’s claim No. 1 Additional Injury and Disease No. 1 of the instant case is approved for medical care from the previous Defendant in relation to the instant accident.

arrow