1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Details of the disposition

On September 5, 2008, the Plaintiff was employed by the company of Master Labor Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant workplace”). From around December 2012, 201, the chest’s answer and the lack of heart is difficult. On February 2013, the Plaintiff was diagnosed as the “waste cancer” (hereinafter “instant injury disease”) on February 12, 2013.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff filed an application for medical care benefits with the Defendant on April 8, 2013, but the Defendant issued a non-approval disposition on January 20, 2014 on the ground that there was no proximate causal relation with the instant injury and disease, following deliberation by the Occupational Disease Determination Committee.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed a request for examination to the Defendant, but was dismissed on June 23, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the gist of the plaintiff's assertion of legality of disposition of the overall purport of the pleadings, the plaintiff worked in the shipbuilding industry for about 29 years. The plaintiff inhaled various hazardous substances, such as hazardous gas, smoke, dust, dust, new dust, metal scrap, asbestos dust for engine protection cover, etc. in a narrow space for a long time.

Although the Plaintiff was smoking in the past, it has been 10 years prior to the outbreak of the injury or disease of this case, and thus, the smoking power does not have a significant influence on the injury or disease of this case.

Therefore, since the injury and disease in this case occurred due to the long-term work in a harmful working environment, the disposition of this case which did not recognize the proximate causal relation between the Plaintiff’s work and the injury and disease in this case is unlawful.

Facts of recognition

The plaintiff argued that the plaintiff worked in the shipbuilding industry from 1982 to 1982, and the details of service have been continuously confirmed from 1985 on the health insurance records, and the plaintiff was in charge of satisfaction or contact work before the business place of this case.

The Plaintiff entered the instant workplace on September 5, 2008 and entered the instant workplace.