1. On July 21, 2015, the Defendant’s disposition of non-approval for medical care rendered to the Plaintiff is revoked.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On April 23, 2015, around 15:30 on April 23, 2015, the Plaintiff was subject to an accident where the Plaintiff was faced with Heari (hereinafter “the instant accident”). Around the course of carrying out a tree operations (a business owner: C) in the Gangseo-gun, Gangwon-gun, G, G, etc. (hereinafter “instant accident”).

B. The Plaintiff filed a medical care benefit application on July 21, 2015 (hereinafter “instant disposition”). However, the Defendant rendered a disposition not to grant medical care on the ground that it could not be recognized as an occupational accident (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the following grounds: (a) it is recognized that the instant accident was caused by the instant accident; (b) it shows the MaI’s opinion that “the instant injury and disease” No. 12-Bu No. 1 (hereinafter “the instant injury and disease”); (c) it shows the MaI’s opinion on the MaI’s ple No. 12-Bu; and (d) it is not an external disease, such as a fluoral absorption, rather than a luoral absorption by external trauma.

C. The Plaintiff filed a request for examination against the instant disposition. On January 19, 2016, the Defendant dismissed the Plaintiff’s request for examination on the ground that, in addition to the opinion on the destruction of a drilling pursuant to the scarcity No. 12-Invertebrate No. 1 of the scarcity 1, it cannot be found that a proximate causal link between the instant disaster and the instant injury and the instant injury and disease cannot be acknowledged, since the opinion on the video materials against the Plaintiff was not observed.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion also occurred due to the instant disaster, and even if the injury or disease of this case was owned by the Plaintiff, the symptoms, such as pains, etc., caused by shocks caused by the instant disaster, and rapidly aggravated treatment beyond the natural progress.