logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2019.09.25 2019구단61710
장해급여부지급처분취소
Text

1. The Defendant’s disposition to pay disability benefits to the Plaintiff on December 2, 2016 is revoked.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. From June 16, 1981 to February 28, 1990, the Plaintiff was a person who worked as a rayer in B, etc. (hereinafter “instant place of business”), and on April 7, 2016, the Plaintiff diagnosed the two sides of the nephalopic chronological chronological chronronronological ect and the nephical chronronic ect (hereinafter “the instant injury”). On April 22, 2016, the Plaintiff claimed disability benefits for the instant injury to the Defendant.

B. However, on December 2, 2016, the Defendant rendered a decision that the Plaintiff would not pay disability benefits claimed by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant disposition”) based on the Defendant Daegu Regional Headquarters’s consolidated Review Team’s opinion, etc., “In short of the standards for return to the Defendant (determined to be considered as the Aged Daehan)” (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C. The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed a request for review with the Board of Audit and Inspection, but the request for review was dismissed on February 26, 2019.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 3-1, Gap evidence 9, 10, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. In light of the fact that the Plaintiff’s summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion was exposed to considerable noise over a long-term period during the work at the instant workplace, which is a noise business place, and there was no record that there was no other disease that could affect the occurrence of the instant injury, there exists a proximate causal link between the Plaintiff’s work and the outbreak of the instant injury.

Therefore, the defendant's disposition of this case made on a different premise is unlawful.

B. Fact-finding 1) The name of injury and disease caused by the Plaintiff’s medical opinion (a non-humanism and disability diagnosis report dated April 7, 2016): The highest hearing power as a result of the positive test on the right 50dB is indicated on the disability diagnosis report in 50dB in the direction of the right ear, but it is 39dB in the real result of the positive test on the right ear (the ear’s ear’s ear’s ear’s ear’s ear’s ear’s ear’s ear’s ear’s ear’s ear’s ear’s ear’s ear’s ear’s ear’s ear.

64dB.

arrow