1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On December 23, 1997, the Plaintiff approved the medical care of “atise-profin escape from external signboards (e.g., the 5th century-1,000)” due to occupational accidents, and was subject to the disposition of grade 8 of the disability grade on March 8, 2011.

On September 12, 2017, the Defendant filed a claim for disability benefits on the ground of “vertebal disorder, spinal disorder, right spathy disorder, right spathy disability, and spathy spathy spathy,” and on October 17, 2017, the Defendant filed a claim for disability benefits on the ground that he/she received re-medical care, such as fixing between drillings, and inserting vertebrate spathy, the right spathy, and spathy spathy.”

B. Accordingly, on August 8, 2018, the Defendant rendered a again a determination of class 8 of the disability grade (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff on the ground that “the Plaintiff is in a state where there exists any limitation on the exercise scope under the influence of the booms due to the 5th century and the 1,000 neighborhood disorders, but falls short of the disability grade, and that the disability status of spine function disorder (Grade 9) and spine neneneneism (Grade 11) is not changed.”

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 5, Eul evidence 1 to 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The plaintiff's assertion is not possible to walk because it is difficult to support the body of the bridge because it is difficult for the plaintiff to move on the bridge due to dystrophism, etc. after the above surgery. While the part of the plaintiff's heading part of the plaintiff's heading part falls under "a person who has a significant obstacle to the function of one pipe among the three major sections of the Han Bridge," the part of the heading part of the plaintiff's heading part of the above 10th grade 14 of the disability grade is denied, thereby denying the part of

B. (1) Determination is based on the following circumstances, i.e., the Plaintiff’s discovery of disability or disability grade: (a) statement No. 5 on the Plaintiff’s development of disability or disability grade; (b) the results of physical assessment on B Hospital Head of this Court; and (c) the purport of the entire pleadings.