1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Details of the disposition

On December 13, 2004, the Plaintiff was an employee of B, who was in the latter part of the next in the aftermath of December 13, 2004 (hereinafter “instant accident”).

The Plaintiff obtained approval from the Defendant as an injury or disease, such as “alleys of the 5th head of the 5th place adjacent to the eth of the ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic

Then, the Defendant determined the Plaintiff’s disability grade as “Grade 9” on the ground that the Plaintiff’s claim for disability benefits is on the ground that “the disability in the part of the left part shall be deemed to be class 12, and that the disability in the right part shall be deemed to be class 10.”

On July 30, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application for re-treatment on the basis of the Plaintiff’s opinion that it is necessary to exclution and excition on the right part, and obtained approval therefor from the Defendant. On September 12, 2014, the Plaintiff completed the treatment by December 31, 2014, after receiving the re-treatment from the Defendant (hereinafter “instant re-treatment”).

On January 6, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a claim for disability benefits with the Defendant on the ground that the state of the above additional medical care aggravated, and the disability grade was raised. On February 10, 2015, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff on February 16, 2015, that disability benefits could not be paid to the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff’s right-hand impairment of the Plaintiff’s right-hand side prior to the instant re-treatment was “where the Plaintiff’s failure to perform the function of one pipe among the three sections of one bridge remains,” which constitutes class 10 identical to the previous one (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

Although the Plaintiff filed a petition for review against this, the Plaintiff was dismissed on July 14, 2015, and the petition for review was again filed, but was dismissed on December 9, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 3, Eul evidence 2 to 6, 8, 9 (including branch numbers), each statement, pleading.