logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2020.07.02 2020재누10013
추가상병불승인처분취소
Text

1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the plaintiff.

purport, purport, ..

Reasons

1. The following facts, which have become final and conclusive in the judgment subject to a retrial, are apparent or apparent in records in this court:

Details of the disposition

1) On December 1, 2014, the Plaintiff’s accident at the price of head of the tree during the wooden work (hereinafter “instant accident”).

(2) On January 10, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an additional injury and disease application with the Defendant on the ground that there was no proximate causal link between the occurrence of the above applicant’s injury and the instant accident or the instant injury and disease on February 20, 2017.

3) The Plaintiff filed an application for re-treatment with the Defendant on January 10, 2017, alleging that the instant accident occurred “Yacheon-gu and Yacheon-gu infection” and that the medical care was necessary for this purpose. However, the Defendant rendered a disposition rejecting the Plaintiff’s application for re-treatment on February 20, 2017 on the ground that there was no proximate causal relation between the occurrence of the instant injury or disease and the instant accident or the injury or disease resulting from the previous approval (hereinafter the foregoing B).

paragraph (c).

Each disposition described in the subsection is subject to each disposition of this case.

(B) B. (1) The Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit in the first instance court by asserting that “The injury or disease for which the Plaintiff applied for additional or additional medical care was obviously caused by the instant accident or the injury or disease resulting from the previous approval, and thus, each of the instant dispositions should be revoked in an unlawful manner.”

2) On November 17, 2017, the first instance court rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim on the grounds that “it is difficult to recognize a proximate causal relationship between the occurrence of an injury or disease that the Plaintiff applied for additional injury or additional medical care and the injury or disease resulting from the instant accident or the previous approval.” 3) The Plaintiff is so dismissed.

arrow