1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, which orders revocation below, shall be revoked.

Defendant.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is a student male, and from November 9, 2009 to June 1, 2012, in D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”), he/she performed the business of mixing bread, and became a member of B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Co., Ltd.”) from January 2, 2014, and performs the business of preserving machinery and equipment.

B. On August 2, 2016, while the Plaintiff was engaged in the work of replacing the parts of the machinery and equipment at the non-party company, the Plaintiff satisfyed the shoulder and received the treatment by being inside the C regularly outside of prison on August 24, 2016. The hospital diagnosed the Plaintiff as “satisfying satfying and extreme satfying and extreme satfying satfying satfy, and satisfying satfys at both sides.”

C. The plaintiff is the defendant.

Although the Defendant filed an application for medical care benefits for an injury or disease described in the port, on November 21, 2016, the Defendant rendered a disposition not to grant medical care to the Plaintiff on the ground that “as a result of the deliberation by the Committee for Determination of Occupational Diseases, it is difficult to deem that the details of the medical care for an injury or disease were confirmed before Nonparty Company’s membership and that there is no proximate causal relation between the duties and the injury or disease.”

On March 10, 2017, the Plaintiff made a request for reexamination to the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Reexamination Committee (hereinafter referred to as the “Review Committee”) on the disposition of non-approval for the above medical care, and the Review Committee made a decision on March 10, 2017 on the ground that “the applicant’s critical material is confirmed on the video material of the Defendant’s injury and disease, but the face-to-speaked collision in the face-to-speaks of the right shoulder and the face-to-speaked collision appears to be an injury and disease caused by the personal influence of the person.”

b) above the above:

Of the injury or disease described in subsections, the remainder except for the extreme stimulsation on the left-hand side by occupational accident at the reexamination stage, namely, the extreme stimulsation on the left-hand side, the extreme stimulsation and extreme stimulsation on the right-hand side, and the collision stimulsation and stimulsation on both sides. The injury or disease of this case is the disease or disease of this case.