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 May 1, 2018, the Plaintiff joined a company B (hereinafter “instant place of business”).

Since then, the plaintiff has been engaged in moving the bowling stuff, etc. in the logistics warehouse of the instant workplace located in Ischeon-si.

B. On June 16, 2018, the Plaintiff was working from 09:0 to 17:00, while drinking water at the Plaintiff’s house on June 17, 2018, and was used as a water.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff was sent back to C Hospital and received the diagnosis of “balopia, cardio-cerebral cerebral cerebrovascular, and right mal mathy” (hereinafter “the instant injury”). (c) On July 26, 2018, the Plaintiff filed a medical care benefit application for the instant injury and disease with the Defendant. As to this, the Defendant did not have any unexpected and unexpected and unexpected changes in the business environment within 24 hours prior to the outbreak, and did not increase more than 30% of average work hours between 12 weeks prior to the outbreak (except for one week prior to the outbreak) and 12 weeks prior to the outbreak. The average work hours between 37 hours prior to the outbreak, 36 hours prior to the outbreak, 30 minutes, and 12 weeks prior to the outbreak, and 36 hours prior to the outbreak, 12 hours prior to the occurrence, and 36 hours prior to the outbreak, or 12 weeks average work hours per week during the instant injury and chronic causal relation between the instant injury and the instant injury.

“The injury or disease of this case” against the Plaintiff on November 2, 2018, according to the result of the determination by the Committee for Determination of Occupational Diseases, does not have a proximate causal relation with its work.

'The disposition of this case' is 'the disposition of this case' for reasons of the decision not to approve the medical care.

[The facts that there is no dispute over the basis of recognition, Gap evidence 1 to 9, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Plaintiff is a healthy male of 34 years of age at the time of the outbreak of the instant injury, who suffered from brain-related diseases before that time, and that time has not been immediately affected by eight years of age.