2017Nu81733 Revocation of the revocation of the disposition to pay disability benefits.

Doz.

Attorney OOO-O

Attorney OOO in a lawsuit sub-agent

Korea Labor Welfare Corporation

Litigation performer ○○○

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2016Gudan65278 decided October 20, 2017

February 13, 2018

March 6, 2018

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. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.

The order is as set forth in the text.

1. Details of the disposition;

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

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The Plaintiff** * The instant disposition was unlawful, even though the noise was continuously exposed during working in a mine and the occurrence of difficulties on both sides, even though it occurred.

B. Relevant statutes

Attached Table 1 shall be as stated in the relevant statutes.

(c) Fact of recognition;

1) The Plaintiff’s work details and the Plaintiff’s work environment worked for about five years and four months from October 19, 1980 to February 28, 1986 ** from the mine to the point of time operation. According to the Defendant’s noise risk management standard (i.e., January 14, 2016) (i.e., the average noise measurement of first cancer out of the average noise measurement by process for five years in operation (at least 20 full-time workers) of the mining center (at least 20 full-time workers) is 89.3dB.

2) Medical opinions have been carried out three times in order to conduct a master examination, and the highest hearing ability is 54dB, the left-hand 52dB, the left-hand 52dB, for about 20 years, and it is judged that there was an impediment of noise by noise except for the elderly, in the high-frequency test.

B) A special medical examination report on industrial accident insurance (the Joseon University Hospital), 55dB, U.S. 55dB, the Plaintiff’s injury and disease (the pathal chronic chronological chronological chronological chronological chronronological chronological ect), and medical malpractices in the work process.

C) Statement of the Defendant’s advisory opinion

As a result of a force test, 56dB, the left 55dB B, the right-hand spadB, inter alia, from 8 KHz to 80dB, the hearing opinion of the elderly from the 8KHz to 80dB, which has deteriorated the hearing ability in high frequency. It is confirmed as the left-hand sensitive spadic spadic spadic spadic spadic spadic spadic spadic spasc

D) As shown in the attached Form 2 of the Inspection Record Book of the Joseon University Hospital.

E) In the case of noise in the first instance court’s request for the appraisal of medical records, the c5dip opinion showing the c5dip opinion showing the c5kHz only in the light of the 4kHz, and the exposure of noise has continued, and the surrounding frequency has also been invaded. When both the and external cells are destroyed, the 5dip opinion showing the 4kHz, and the 5dip opinion showing the 1st century, and when both the 1stma cells were destroyed, the 1st rate rate rate rate is lost from the 60dB’s luxum level, and the luxal change has occurred, the luxity in the high frequency area is entirely lost and the low frequency area is also committed. In addition to this, it seems difficult to conclude that the luxal hearing has a significant impact on the luxian frequency beyond the 1st and00 Hz. In light of these materials, it is difficult to conclude that the luxal defect and the luxal defect in the light of noise.

The criteria for the diagnosis of non-epidemic noise sources are as follows: (1) the permanent dialogic panscopic panscopic panscopic panscopic panscopic panscopic panscopic panscopic panscopic (8 hours a day,85dB or more noise), (3) the lucopic panscopic luscopic luscopic luscopic luscopic luscopic luscopic luscopic luscopicscopic luscopic luscopic luscopicscopic luscopic luscopic luscopic luscopicscopic luscopic luscopicscopic luscopscop

When considering only in accordance with the above criteria that excludes No. 500, it is difficult to determine that ①, ②, and ② are satisfied, ③ are both sides loss or sub-names, ④ because the results of the previous examination are not known, it is difficult to determine. ⑤ In the case of this, the right hearing power is the right hearing power, but it does not fall under the left-hand hearing power. The right hearing power may be doubtful of noise, but the left-hand hearing power is likely to be more difficult to determine because the people in distress other than the noise hearing room are overlapping.

Considering the medical history and the fact that there is a continuous conjection in the addition of the Central Exchange Agency, it is doubtful that there is a stimulent stimultitis in the initial state and that there is a possibility that the stimult stimult stimult stimult stimult stimult stimultivity will be helpful to confirm whether there is a opinion to the extent that the stimult stimult stimult sti

In the opinion of the physician's opinion on the examination of force in 2009, both names of the parties to the examination will be seen.

In addition, even though a one-time test site, Cheongdoz’s Cheongdoz’s Cheongdoz’s Cheongdoz’s Cheongdoz’s Cheongdoz’s Cheongdoz’s Cheongdoz’s Cheongdoz’s Cheongdoz’s Cheongdoz’s Cheongdoz’s Cheongdoz’s Cheongdoz’s Cheongdoz’s result is also similar in 2010. In contrast, the results of Cheongdog’s Cheongdog’s Cheongdoz’s Cheongdoz’s Cheongdog in 2015 showed

When considering that the degree of noise exposure to presses is similar to the intensity of the appraiser's noise exposure, the right hearing by the appraiser shows a tendency similar to the degree of noise exposure by the presses 4-7-year exposure period of the presses scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scop

[Ground of recognition] A.6 to 9, and 11 (including branch numbers), each entry into a dispute; the result of the first instance court’s entrustment of medical records to the head of the A.I. University Hospital; the purport of the entire pleadings

D. Determination

The occupational accident under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act refers to an accident caused by a worker's performance of his/her duties, and thus there exists a causal relationship between his/her duties and the disaster, but even if the existing disease is not directly related to his/her duties, if the accident becomes worse or its symptoms are created only due to the accident, etc. which occurred in connection with his/her duties, the causal relationship between his/her duties shall be deemed to exist. In such cases, even though the causal relationship shall be proved by the party asserting it, the causal relationship shall not be necessarily clearly proved by medical and natural science, but it shall not be necessarily proved by the medical and natural science, considering all the circumstances, such as the worker's health condition at the time of employment, the occurrence of the disease, the details of the disease, and the progress of treatment (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 200Du4422, Nov. 10, 200).

* The plaintiff was diagnosed by each side of the dialogic chillic chillic chillic chillic chillic chillic chillic chillic chillic chillic chillic chillic chillic chillic chillic chillic chillics of February 28, 1986, when 23 years have elapsed since the plaintiff retired from the mine, and the age of the plaintiff was 72 years old at that time

However, in full view of the above recognized facts and the following circumstances, it is reasonable to view that the Plaintiff’s scopic copic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic sc

① The Plaintiff’s doctor, the doctor in charge of the special medical examination at the Joseon University, and the Defendant’s advice were diagnosed as noise in distress. The Plaintiff’s medical record appraisal at the first instance court also expressed the Plaintiff’s opinion that it was noise in distress.

② At the early stage of a noise-related hearing, it is difficult to see that the noise-related pansculing was made in a high-speed pansculing, which is almost rarely necessary in daily life, and that the pansculing pansculing of time, and that the pansculing of the pansculing of the pansculing, and the pansculing of the panscul

③ The Defendant asserts that the Plaintiff’s hearing ability is too far away from the calendar of 1,00 Hz on both sides, and that it cannot be recognized as a noise-related hearing. However, as the age increase, the elderly’s hearing difficulties increase, especially in the frequency of 1,00 Hz above 1,00 Hz, there seems to have been a significant increase in the Cheong power loss from the frequency of more than 1,00 Hz. However, as the inspection record book of the attached Joseon University Hospital, the Plaintiff’s hearing power on both sides is considerably increasing from the frequency of 1,00 Hz below 1,00 H and the trend of Cheong power loss in the frequency of 1,000 H above 1,00H, it is difficult to view that it does not coincide with the characteristics of the general elderly hearing in light of the fact that the first instance court’s medical record appraisal results showed that the possibility of Cheong ability loss on both sides after the first diagnosis of the Plaintiff’s Cheong ability disorder and around 2009 and around 2010 N.

④ According to the result of a fact-finding conducted by the first instance court on the Director of the Korea Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2010 - 2012), the Defendant asserts that the degree of Cheongman loss by people aged 70 or older who have shown Cheongman symptoms is 57.3dB, and that the Plaintiff’s Cheongman's Cheongman did not have any specific difference between the above result and the Plaintiff’s Cheongwon loss level (for each 5dB), it is difficult to recognize that the above national health nutrition survey conducted by the first instance court on the ground that there was 3 months or more of noise at a place such as machine or power generation so far, 5 or more hours of noise from a week outside of the occupation, 5 or more hours of noise from a view of general public, 7 or more hours of noise from a view that it is not a result of a fact-finding survey that is not an average of Cheongman's ability to respond to the above determination on whether there is a high level of noise from a view, such as an average 5 or more hours of noise.

⑤ In light of the medical record appraisal in the first instance court’s medical record’s medical history and the fact that there is a continuous conjection in light of the medical record inserted by a foreign exchange institution, it is not enough to recognize that the medical record appraisal in the first instance court’s medical record constitutes a case where there is an obvious disease, which is a cause for exclusion from noise level hearing as stipulated in Article 34(2) and 34(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Industrial Accident Compensation Act (attached Table 3) solely on the basis of the above opinion.

Therefore, there is a proximate causal relationship between the Plaintiff’s loss of hearing power and the Plaintiff’s work at the noise workplace. Thus, the instant disposition made on a different premise by the Defendant is unlawful.

3. Conclusion

If so, the plaintiff's claim is reasonable, and the judgment of the court of first instance is unfair with a different conclusion, so it is revoked and the disposition of this case is revoked.

Justices Shin Young-chul and decorations

Judges Lee Jong-chul

Judges Lee Jae-chul

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.