logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2017.06.13 2016구단354
휴업급여 일부 부지급처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. On September 10, 200, the Plaintiff was injured in the form of an accident, such as a gyeast gymnasium gymnasium gymnasium gymnasium gymnasium gymnasium gymnasium gymnasium gym

The Plaintiff filed for additional medical care to the Defendant for the removal of the following conditions and the transplantation of the board board (hereinafter “instant surgery”) of the emulative convenience, and obtained approval from the Defendant for additional medical care to December 27, 2015 for the period of care for outpatient treatment from October 5, 2015 to December 27, 2015, and received the instant surgery from C Hospital on October 5, 2015.

The Plaintiff filed a claim for temporary layoff benefits with the Defendant from October 5, 2015 to November 5, 2015, and received such temporary layoff benefits from the Defendant.

On December 8, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a claim for temporary layoff benefits with the Defendant from November 6, 2015 to December 7, 2015. On December 18, 2015, the Defendant issued a disposition to pay temporary layoff benefits only for one day (on December 2, 2015) for which the Plaintiff actually received medical care during the said period, on the grounds that employment treatment was possible during the said period.

On December 29, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a claim for temporary layoff benefits against the Defendant from December 8, 2015 to December 27, 2015. On January 5, 2016, the Defendant issued a disposition to pay temporary layoff benefits for the remainder of the period on the ground that employment treatment was possible during the aforementioned period only one day (on December 21, 2015) for which the Plaintiff actually received outpatient treatment, and to not pay temporary layoff benefits for the aforementioned period.

(hereinafter referred to as “each disposition of this case” in each of the above dispositions). [Grounds for recognition] Gap's evidence 1, Eul's evidence 3, 5, 6, and 7, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Plaintiff works during the period from November 6, 2015 to December 27, 2015 due to medical care, such as the instant surgery.

arrow