1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. On June 13, 2014, the Defendant issued a partial interim payment of temporary layoff benefits against the Plaintiff.

1. The court's explanation concerning this part of the grounds for the decision of the court of first instance is the same as that of Paragraph (1). Thus, this part of the grounds for the decision of the court of first instance is cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff could not be employed during the key period of the instant case due to medical care due to the instant injury and disease. As such, the Plaintiff was entitled to temporary layoff benefits for the entire key period, the instant disposition on a different premise is unlawful.

B. Determination 1) Temporary layoff benefits under Article 52 of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act are paid as compensation for benefits for a period during which an employee was injured or has not been employed as a medical care for an occupational reason. The term “period during which an employee was unable to work as a result of medical care for an occupational injury or disease” refers to the period during which the employee was unable to receive wages because of his/her failure to work as a result of medical care for an occupational injury or disease. It includes not only the period during which the employee was treated as an occupational disease at a medical institution, but also the period during which he/she was unable to work as a result of his/her occupational injury or disease (see Supreme Court Decision 88Nu205, Jun. 27, 1989; Supreme Court Decision 88Nu205, Jun. 27, 198; 2001; 15Du1651, May 16, 2005; 2015Du1614, May 26, 2001).