1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On November 13, 2012, the Plaintiff, as an employee of the Jindong Co., Ltd. (the next, Nonparty Co., Ltd.) (the next, the Plaintiff was involved in the accident of this case) involving 20 meters pipe-m20 meters from the front of the front of the front of the front of the front of the front, while entering the boiler replacement construction site in the Jindong-dong, Namdong-gu, Nam-gu, Seoul, Seoul, on a shoulder-gu.

B. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff suffered damage to the upper part of the instant disaster, and applied for medical care to the Defendant. However, on July 15, 2015, the Defendant, on the ground that the diagnosis of the upper part of the instant accident was unclear, and that it was a negori damage that was incurred in the lower part of the border where the non-approval of medical care was issued (the instant disposition was conducted under the following).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 8, purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination on the legitimacy of the disposition

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff’s injury to the upper left-hand side of the instant wound is a disease that may occur due to an acute trauma, not a sediment, and cannot be deemed to have occurred due to the Defendant’s failure to grant medical care on September 11, 2013. However, the Defendant committed the instant disposition without recognizing the causal relationship with the instant disaster solely on the ground that the instant injury was a vegetable damage that occurred on the ground that the instant injury was a vegetable damage that occurred on the part of the Plaintiff’s rank, and thus, was unlawful.

B. (1) In order to be recognized as “occupational accident” under Article 5 subparag. 1 of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act, the injury in question is caused by the occupational accident, and there is a proximate causal relation between the occupational accident and the accident. In this case, the causal relation between the employee’s occupational accident and the accident must be proved by the assertion.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2003Du8449 delivered on December 26, 2003). (2) As to the instant case.