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. The reasoning for this case by the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except for dismissal or addition as follows. Thus, this case shall be quoted in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

On 3 pages 18 of the first instance court's decision, "No. 3, 2017" shall be "No. 27, 2017".

7.On the 11th page, the following shall be added:

On November 2, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a claim against the Defendant for the payment of the difference of injury-disease compensation annuity from April 2002 after correcting the disability grade to Grade I. On December 4, 2017, the Defendant asserted to the effect that, “in the case of disability grade 2, grade 6 is deemed appropriate, and that the period of extinctive prescription expires from April 20 to November 1, 2014 during the period of request,” on the ground that “the Plaintiff’s invalidity grade is adjusted to Grade I, and the period of application is determined to be the date of issuance of a medical certificate on August 12, 2004,” the Defendant again asserted to the effect that the instant disposition was unlawful on the ground that the period of extinctive prescription expires for the reason that the instant judgment was revoked (Article 2018 subparag. 838 of the Industrial Accident Compensation Committee), and thus, the instant disposition was unlawful.

On the other hand, the binding force of the ruling shall only affect the judgment on the specific grounds of illegality such as the order of the ruling and the recognition and judgment of the facts constituting the premise thereof, i.e., disposition, etc., and the previous disposition was revoked by the ruling.

Even if there is a difference between the previous disposition and the previous disposition, it does not conflict with the binding force. Here, whether it is the same reason or not is the same or a different reason is recognized as illegal for the previous disposition and its identity in the basic facts and facts determined in the judgment.