1. The lower court’s determination of disability grade rendered to the Plaintiff on August 8, 2013 is revoked.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On December 18, 2012, the Plaintiff was at the construction site located in Dongdaemun-gu Seoul session, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul, and was involved in an accident that caused the stone to fall on the left-hand leg, and caused the damage to the cross-face pressure (hereinafter “instant injury”) and received medical treatment until July 31, 2013, and then claimed disability benefits to the Defendant.

B. On August 8, 2013, the Defendant decided and notified the Plaintiff on August 8, 2013 under disability grade 8 10 (hereinafter “instant disposition”) based on the opinion of advisory opinion, etc. that “the state of cutting from the sacrife 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 sacrife base and the sacrife base base.”

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap 1 Certificate, Eul 1 Certificate

2. Summary of the plaintiff's assertion

A. The Plaintiff had, after the medical care due to the instant accident, an obstacle in the state of “satisfafafafafafafafafafafafafafafafafafafafafafafafafaf fafafafafafafaf fafafafafaf fafafafab

B. Therefore, according to Article 53(3) of the Enforcement Decree of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act (where there is a disability not provided for in attached Table 6, the disability grade 7 shall be applied to the Plaintiff, and the Defendant’s disposition different therefrom is unlawful.

3. Whether the disposition is lawful;

(a) Related Acts and subordinate statutes: It shall be as shown in Appendix;

B. In full view of the medical opinion evidence Nos. 1 through 7, Nos. 1 and 2, the result of this court’s request for the medical record appraisal to the Korean Medical Association, and the overall purport of the arguments for fact inquiry to B hospital, the following medical opinions are recognized.

1) The Plaintiff provided medical treatment from March 11, 2013 to July 31, 2013.

The plaintiff was placed in the state of cutting down on the left-hand side and cutting down of the middle-satise executives after the double-satiseing.

The left-hand side of the plaintiff is the status of "one to five executive members".

-.