1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. From November 23, 1978 to November 1, 2004, the Plaintiff (B) belonged to the D Mining Complex in C Co., Ltd. to E Co., Ltd. and worked as the digging part from the Korea Coal Corporation’s D Mining Complex from January 2, 2012 to November 28, 2013, respectively.

B. On October 19, 2015, the Plaintiff was diagnosed by the F. B. N. F. M. F. M. F. M. F. M. F. M. F. M. F. M. F. M. F. M. F. M. F. M. C., and claimed disability benefits to the Defendant on March 14, 2016.

C. On May 10, 2017, the Defendant rendered a disposition to pay disability benefits (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff according to the results of deliberation by the Integrated Review Committee of Seoul Regional Headquarters that “The present difficult situation was caused by past business when considering the current age, although it is difficult for the Defendant to avoid the impact of noise when considering the period and environment exposed to the excessive noise environment.”

On February 8, 2018, the Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed a request for review with the Board of Audit and Inspection, but the Board of Audit and Inspection dismissed the Plaintiff’s request for review on October 8, 2018.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 3, 6 through 10, Eul evidence 4 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion was exposed to more than 85dB noise in the course of performing coal and digging operations for about 28 years at C’s D Mining and the Korea Coal Corporation’s D Mining and Mining Corporation for about nine years and nine months, and thereby, the occurrence of noise hazards.

Even if the plaintiff's difficult hearing is deemed to be mixed with the noise in distress and the elderly in distress, it can be deemed that the elderly in distress due to the noise in distress led to the progress of the natural progress and the situation of the present in distress. Therefore, a proximate causal relationship between the plaintiff's difficult hearing and the affairs is recognized.

Therefore, this is different.