logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2015.09.25 2014구단1294
추가상병및재요양불승인처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On September 22, 2008, while working as an employee belonging to the Co., Ltd., the Plaintiff received medical treatment on March 15, 201 after the medical treatment on the part of "humphal base, humphal base, humphal base, 3-4 conical signboard escape certificate, humphale of the high-speed conical base, and humphalin hume," and concluded medical treatment on March 29, 201, and on March 29, 2013, it is necessary to conduct the Defendant’s humphal and hume removal surgery on the humphalty humphalty (hereinafter “the instant additional disease”).

‘The additional medical care application was filed according to the doctor's opinion.B) The defendant applied for the additional medical care on April 17, 2013, "MRI's 3-4, 4-5 metreacy" was an opinion unrelated to the fixing of the existing evidence, and the reason for enforcing the removal of the existing 3-4 metacy Baba, which is not reasonable.

‘Disposition' which does not approve the above application in accordance with the medical opinion(hereinafter referred to as ‘Disposition' of this case.

[The facts that there is no dispute over the basis of recognition, Gap evidence 1 to 3, Eul evidence 1, 2, and 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff was at the time of the operation of the 3-4-5th century due to the traffic accident before the accident in this case. However, since the 5th metebrate was cut out due to the accident in this case, it is necessary to perform an additional seizure and removal as to the additional disease in this case, the defendant's disposition in this case based on the different premise is unlawful, although it is necessary to do so.

B. (1) The Plaintiff was diagnosed on September 22, 2008 due to the instant accident and approved for the medical care, and up to March 15, 201, the Plaintiff’s injury, “the climatic base, the climatic base, the climatic base, the climatic signboard escape certificate, the climatic base, the climatic climatic part, the climatic blimatic bromatic blide, and the neromatic blide.”

arrow