The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked.

On January 12, 2017, the defendant's disposition of disability benefit site level against the plaintiff shall be revoked.

Details of the disposition

In addition, the Plaintiff (BB) served for approximately 13 years from January 1, 1975 to January 31, 198 as Boswon Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant business establishment”).

On January 29, 2016, the Plaintiff was diagnosed by the Yangchine Ethal Ethal Ethal Ethal Ethal Ethal Ethal Estal Estal Estal Estal Estal Estal Estal Estal Estal Estal Estal Estal Estal Estal Estal Estal Estal Estal Estal Estal Estal Estal

On January 12, 2017, the Defendant rendered a disposition on disability benefit site level (hereinafter “instant disposition”) against the Plaintiff on the ground that “it cannot be deemed that the Plaintiff had been exposed to noise above 85dB annually for more than three years, and there is a concern to recognize a proximate causal relation with the work of the instant upper branch according to a medical opinion, and the period of three years from February 21, 2007, which was the initial date of extinctive prescription, by submitting a written application for disability benefit, has exceeded the extinctive prescription of the right to claim disability benefit.”

In response to the instant disposition, the Plaintiff filed a request for review with the Board of Audit and Inspection. However, the Board of Audit and Inspection rejected the Plaintiff’s request for review on February 22, 2019 on the following grounds: “The Plaintiff’s request for review on February 22, 2019 for the following reasons: “The Plaintiff’s request for review is difficult to accept, in light of the following: (a) the Plaintiff’s request for review on the possibility of the merger of senior citizens is the lapse of a long time after the suspension of exposure to occupational noise; (b) the Plaintiff’s request for review on February 22, 2019, for the special examination that there was no data on the examination within several years after the Plaintiff was on duty or after retirement; and (c) the applicant’s request for review on the following facts: (a) the Plaintiff’s request for review on the following facts: (a) the applicant’s

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6 (including branch numbers, if any; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the entire pleadings.