logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2019.01.10 2017구합7331
요양급여불승인처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On August 20, 1990, the Plaintiff was employed in the Ulsan Factory after becoming a member of the Ulsan Factory. On November 10, 2016, around 16:30, the Plaintiff was diagnosed by D Hospital as “the 3rd sacrific sacrine escape certificate (2/3, 4/5 sacrific sacrific sacrific sacrifs),” and was diagnosed as “the 2/3, 4/5 sacrific sacrific sacrifs, sacrific sacrifs, and tensions” in the D Hospital around March 2017.

B. On April 5, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for medical care benefits on the credit rating of the 4-5 side and the 5th century, and on July 5, 2017, the Defendant rendered the instant disposition that partially rejected the said application on the ground that there is no proximate causal relation with the duties, among the above injury and disease in the above application, “The 4-5 side of the 4-5 side signboard (hereinafter “the 4-5 side”) is recognized as having a proximate causal relation with the duties.”

C. The Plaintiff appealed and filed a petition for review with the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Reexamination Committee seeking revocation of the instant disposition, but the said Committee dismissed the said petition on October 19, 2017.

【Ground of recognition】 The facts without any dispute, Gap’s 1 through 3, 5-2, 6 through 8, Eul’s 1, 3, 12, and 13, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion has been engaged in a long-term work that imposes a burden on Huuri, and on November 10, 2016, the Plaintiff was diagnosed of the instant injury and disease in Huna, etc. while carrying out the work of entering the Ael Construction, etc., which had no choice but to impose a significant burden on Huuri, and thus, there is a proximate causal link between the Plaintiff’s work and the instant injury and disease.

Therefore, the instant disposition made on a different premise is unlawful.

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

C. The Plaintiff’s work form, etc. is recognized.

arrow