1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. From October 4, 1985, the Plaintiff worked in the Hyundai Heavy Industries, Hyundai Heavy Co., Ltd. on May 8, 2009, the Plaintiff was diagnosed on May 25, 2009 as “the first medical care benefit application was filed with the Defendant on May 25, 2009.”

B. On August 13, 2009, the Defendant approved the Plaintiff’s medical care for the reasons that the Plaintiff’s claimed injury and injury were “the first injury and injury and injury and injury caused by the anti-monthly depression within the slots, the first injury and injury, and the second injury and injury were non-approval.” Around that time, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking revocation against the non-approval.

C. Around March 7, 201, the time when the medical care of the above approved injury and disease was closed, the Plaintiff filed a claim with the Defendant for disability benefits related to the above approved injury and disease. The Defendant determined that the Plaintiff’s disability grade was class 7, on the ground that the Plaintiff’s right bridge fell under the Plaintiff’s disability grade 12 grade 10 or 7, and that the Plaintiff’s disability grade was determined to be class 7, on the ground that the Plaintiff’s right bridge fell under the Plaintiff’s disability grade 12 or 10, as the Plaintiff’s disability grade as the Plaintiff’s disability grade 12 or 10, as the Plaintiff’s right bridge fell under “the person who has hindered the function of one of the three major sections of one bridge.”

On the other hand, on November 30, 201, when the lawsuit on the above non-approval injury was pending, the Defendant re-issued the above non-approval injury to the upper part of the injury disease "as a result of the court's recommendation on November 30, 201, the Defendant approved the "damage to the upper part of the dog, the stoke, the stoke, the stoke in the right stoke, the right stoke in the left part."

E. On July 10, 2013, while the Plaintiff received a disability pension under class 7 of the disability grade adjustment, the Plaintiff’s disability grade to the Defendant pursuant to Article 59 of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act.