1. The Defendant’s disposition of partial payment of medical care expenses against the Plaintiff on July 2, 2013 is revoked.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

On January 1, 2008, the Plaintiff joined Manosung Motor Vehicle Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) on September 16, 2008, and was in line with Chasssis-A process on September 16, 2008, and was doing so at around 20:00 on June 17, 201, and was doing so, and was making efforts to do so, and was given medical treatment to the Defendant, as a result of the medical treatment of “the instant accident” (hereinafter referred to as “the instant accident”), the Plaintiff received an application for the medical care benefits for the diagnosis of the Defendant, “the instant accident was satisfyed with the shoulder upper part of the shoulder, the right shoulder, the lower part of the shoulder, the right shoulder part of the back part of the check, the right satfying part of the bar, the right satfying part of this case, the right satisfy, and the Defendant applied for the diagnosis of the Defendant.”

B. Accordingly, on November 22, 2011, the Defendant rendered a disposition not to approve the Plaintiff’s application for medical care benefits on the ground that there is no proximate causal relation with the above injury and disease, and the Plaintiff appealed against the above non-approval disposition and filed a request for examination and reexamination. However, the Defendant decided to dismiss the Plaintiff’s request for examination, and the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Reexamination Committee rendered a ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s request for reexamination on March 22, 2012.

C. On the other hand, on March 13, 2013, the Plaintiff: (a) received medical treatment by brushing the pain; (b) received the diagnosis of banaart Byung; and (c) filed an application for medical care benefits to the Defendant on April 2, 2013; and (d) on April 25, 2013, the Defendant rendered a disposition of non-approval of the Plaintiff’s application for medical care benefits on the ground that there is no proximate causal relation between the above branch and the business thereof.

On September 5, 2013, the plaintiff appealed against the above non-approval disposition and the defendant dismissed the plaintiff's request on September 5, 2013, but the above injury and disease of the plaintiff is not a typical banaart bottle, so it is not recognized, and it is recognized as changing it to the dynamics path, according to the results of deliberation by the Busan Committee for Determination of Occupational Disease.