logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2015.01.21 2014구단9205
장해등급결정처분취소
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. On October 11, 2013, the Plaintiff, a daily employee affiliated with Doam Construction Co., Ltd., was receiving medical care until March 17, 2014, and filed a claim for disability benefits against the Defendant on March 25, 2014, for disability benefits, on the ground that, during the installation of household facilities (tur Team) at the site of the East Sea Pollution Purification Project, the burner was faced with the Plaintiff’s arms, and the Plaintiff was receiving medical care until March 17, 2014.

B. On April 3, 2014, the Defendant decided and notified the Plaintiff on April 3, 2014 (hereinafter “instant disposition”). The Defendant’s exercise angle was 120 degrees, and that the Defendant fell under class 12 9 of the disability grade (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Judgment of the court below] The plaintiff 1 and the plaintiff 1

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that “The scope of exerciseable scope of the grandchildren was limited to not less than 1/2 of the normal scope due to the instant disaster” was expressed by the doctor’s opinion.

If the cause of the physical disability is clear, the defendant should make a determination by applying the physical disability ‘the physical disability area by the fluor movement', but the defendant has made a decision to grade 12 disability by measuring the respective levels of the fluor movement, which is unlawful.

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;

C. In full view of the statements in Gap 1 and 3 as well as the overall purport of the arguments as a result of the physical examination entrusted to the Chief of the Seoul National University Hospital, the following medical opinions may be recognized. In the case of the plaintiff, the performance of the operation was performed due to the climatic surgery in the case of the defendant's advisory opinion (not less than 180 degrees, 80 degrees, and 1/2 of the normal range): Grade 12 (limited to not less than 180 degrees, 120 degrees, 120 degrees, and 1/4 of the normal range) in the disability grade (limited to not less than 180 degrees, 180 degrees, 120 degrees, and 1/4 of the movement scope) in the court appraisal (in the case of the plaintiff, the exercise scope in the case of the Seoul National University Hospital and B: the right handline of the plaintiff.

arrow