1. The Defendant’s disposition of disability ratings rendered against the Plaintiff on December 19, 2011 is revoked.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. From July 4, 1983 to December 31, 2009, the Plaintiff worked as a mountain source through digging in Dong-dong Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”).

B. On September 29, 2010, the Plaintiff filed a claim for disability benefits with the Defendant on the ground that “the Plaintiff was receiving a diagnosis of pnene thromatic disorder” while working as a digging source at a mine site in the border area where noise exceeding 85dB was generated from July 4, 1983 to December 31, 2009 by the Plaintiff.

C. On February 14, 2011, the Defendant rendered a disposition of disability benefit site pay in accordance with medical opinions that the Plaintiff could have raised difficulties due to any other cause, not the noise risk office, and the left-hand side seems to have seen the hearing room of 38dB by the six-minute method. However, on December 19, 2011, the Defendant’s defect in the request for examination against the Plaintiff was 38dB on the left-hand side and below 40dB on the right-hand side and below 70dB on the ground that the Plaintiff fell under subparagraph 1 of class 14 of the disability grade, the Defendant revoked the above disposition of disability benefit site pay in question and decided the disability grade as 14 on the right-hand side (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

On April 13, 2012, the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Review Committee rejected the request for reexamination on the ground that the Plaintiff’s hearing power on April 13, 2012 recognized the left-hand 38dB and the right-hand 63dB, which is the most good result, among the net hearing conducted by the Gangwon-dong Hospital, falls short of the disability grade standards, but the right-hand side falls short of the disability grade standards, but the right-hand side falls short of not less than 40dB and less than 70dB under class 1 of class 1

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap 1 through 7, Eul 1, the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion is that the plaintiff's ability has not been deteriorated since December 31, 2009 when leaving the place of business of the non-party company. Thus, the plaintiff's assertion constitutes a noise-related hearing. The average loss by both ear are at least 40dB, and 1m is at least.