1. The Defendant’s disposition of approval for medical care rendered to B on November 10, 2014 is revoked.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is a person operating the gas station C located in Pyeongtaek-si (hereinafter “instant gas station”). The Defendant Intervenor B (hereinafter “B”) served as a gas station in the instant gas station during the period from March 20, 2014 to April 7, 2014.

B. On April 23, 2014, B asserted that, around April 14, 2014, the Defendant was injured by the tax system, while cleaning female toilets of the instant gas station (hereinafter “instant accident”) and filed an application for medical care benefits by asserting that he/she was injured by the tax system, while he/she was under cleaning female toilets of the instant gas station (hereinafter “instant accident”).

C. On May 15, 2014, the Defendant did not approve B’s above application on the grounds that there is a lack of objective data to acknowledge the instant accident, and that there is no urgency of the human being. D

B filed a request for reexamination with the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Reexamination Committee, and on October 2, 2014, it is probable that the committee did not witness the instant accident any time when the number of workers of the gas station of this case was small, and the committee changed the name of the disease to the fluoral fest A to the fluoral fluor (hereinafter “the instant injury”) and revoked the Defendant’s disposition of non-approval of medical care on the ground that it is reasonable to determine the person by changing the name of the disease to the fluoral fluor (hereinafter “instant injury”).

E. Accordingly, on November 10, 2014, the Defendant rendered a disposition to approve the medical care for the instant injury and disease (hereinafter “instant disposition”) against B (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 4, Eul evidence 1 and 4 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The date and time of the instant accident alleged by the Plaintiff B, as the date of the instant accident, B, which was discovered while having committed an unlawful act at the gas station in the instant case, was dismissed, and B, as the date of the occurrence, did not directly clean the toilet.

In addition, B does not talk about the instant accident.