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 July 20, 1998, the Plaintiff joined the Plaintiff, which is a subcontractor within the Gaiss (former Han Steel Co., Ltd.) and retired from the Gazir on April 30, 2013, via copiros, on the ground that the Plaintiff was exposed to work noise and caused “noise risk (hereinafter “the instant injury”). On June 19, 2013, the Plaintiff claimed disability benefits to the Defendant on June 19, 201.

B. On July 10, 2013, the Defendant rendered a disposition on the Plaintiff’s disability benefit site payment (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that “it is reasonable to view the Plaintiff’s dysium to be both sides, which is the general feature of the noise level dysium, and is more serious than the noise level dysium, as the left-hand hysium dysium.”

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Entry of Evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 11, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff worked for a long period of not less than three years in the working environment exposed to noise exceeding 85dB.

Even if the Plaintiff had a basic disease on the left-hand left-hand back by conducting an operation on the top-hand ear, as such, since the noise generated from the place of business has rapidly deteriorated the hearing ability more than the natural progress speed, the instant disposition that did not regard the instant disease as an occupational disease is unlawful.

Meanwhile, the degree of the Plaintiff’s hearing loss on the left-hand side is not less than 40dB, and the degree of the Plaintiff’s hearing loss on the left-hand side cannot be distinguished from the degree of the hearing loss on the left-hand side’s basic disease and the degree of the hearing loss on the ground of occupational reasons. Thus, the disability grade falls under class 1 of class 14.

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

C. Fact 1) The Plaintiff is a subcontractor in the Cheongste (Gu Han Steel) corporation on July 20, 1998, which is the Plaintiff’s working environment and Cheongste (Gu Hanste Steel).