logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2019.06.27 2017구단100521
요양불승인처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. From May 28, 2015, the Plaintiff, as an employee of Company B, performed the work of cable distribution and pooling work at the site of the extension of the C plant located at the time of Jinjin-si.

B. On July 4, 2015, at around 13:50 on July 4, 2015, the Plaintiff: (a) was unable to be satisfed with body in order to cover up approximately 80 cm in height in the process of cable drilling and landing lines at the construction site; and (b) was used as a satisfying with body in order to pass down.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). C.

The Plaintiff filed an application for medical care with the Defendant as “satisfing-out transfusion” under the instant accident (hereinafter “the instant injury”). However, on April 12, 2016, the Defendant rendered a disposition of non-approval for medical care.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”) D.

The Plaintiff, dissatisfied with the instant disposition, filed a petition for review to the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Reexamination Committee, but was dismissed on December 23, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. In light of the fact that the Plaintiff’s assertion had worked without a holiday for nine consecutive days prior to the occurrence of the instant accident, and that the Plaintiff continued to extend the period of work and worked on holidays with physical power, thereby suffering from considerable mental stress, and that the Plaintiff worked in a narrow working space, there is a proximate causal relation between the Plaintiff’s work and the instant injury and disease, and the instant injury and disease constitute occupational accidents.

Therefore, the defendant's disposition of this case is unlawful.

B. The disease, which is an occupational accident under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act, refers to the disease caused by the worker’s work while performing his/her duties, so there should be a causal relationship between the work and the disease, and the causal relationship must be proved by the party asserting it.

arrow