1. The Defendant’s disposition to pay pneumoconiosis insurance benefits payable to the Plaintiff on October 11, 2016 is revoked.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff, who was engaged in dusty work at the Mining Center B, applied for medical care benefits for pneumoconiosis to the Defendant.

B. From July 19, 2016 to December 21, 2016, the Plaintiff undergone a precise diagnosis of pneumoconiosis at the Bosasan Hospital. At the chest video examination, the shape/scale q/q and the density of noise level 1/0 was expressed.

C. On September 7, 2016, the Defendant determined the Plaintiff’s pneumoconiosis-type symptoms (0/1) as a result of the review by the Pneumoconiosis Review Board on the diagnosis of pneumoconiosis, and issued a disposition of non-approval for pneumoconiosis medical care (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. As a result of the precise diagnosis of pneumoconiosis conducted by the Plaintiff against the Plaintiff, the instant disposition taken on a different premise is unlawful, even though the Plaintiff’s disease type with a 1/00q, and density 1/00 constitutes the beneficiary of pneumoconiosis insurance benefits under the first type.

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

C. Determination as to Gap evidence Nos. 2 and 3 and the following circumstances revealed by adding the whole purport of arguments as a result of the request for the examination of medical records to the head of the Seoul Hospital at the relevant court, i.e., the Plaintiff’s evaluation of this court which evaluated the Plaintiff’s chest video shall be diagnosed as Type No. 1 (p/q, and density 1/0). ② The Defendant’s examination of pneumoconiosis conducted from July 19, 2016 to July 21, 2016 also coincide with the opinion of the above appraisal, it is reasonable to view that at least the pneumoconiosis type falls under Type No. 1 and is at least Grade No. 13, and thus, the disposition of this case is unlawful on a different premise.

3. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is accepted on the grounds of its reasoning.