1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The Defendant’s disposition to pay disability benefits to the Plaintiff on December 31, 2015 is revoked.

3.

1. The reasoning of the judgment by the court is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, this part of the judgment is cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion was unlawful in the instant disposition that took place on a different premise, even though the Plaintiff was continuously exposed to noise while working in the C Company and the occurrence of difficulties on both sides.

(b) The details of the relevant statutes are as shown in Appendix 1.

C. Fact-finding 1) The Plaintiff’s work process and work environment were conducted three times from October 19, 1980 to February 28, 1986, for about five years and four months from C companies. According to Defendant’s noise risk management standards (as of January 14, 2016), the Defendant’s noise level for five years of operating mining establishments (as of 20 or more full time workers)’ average noise measurement for five years of operating mining establishments (as of 89.3dB), the first-time medical opinion was conducted three times in order to verify Cheongsung’s health records, 54DB, the right-hand side environment (as of 52dB), and the Plaintiff’s health damage from 5th anniversary of the average noise measurement of operating establishments (as of January 14, 2016), it is determined that there was any injury to the left-hand side of Cheongsung’s disease from 50 years of Cheongsung’s health damage.