1. The Defendant’s decision-making disposition on the part of the Plaintiff on March 16, 2018 shall be revoked.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On December 10, 2013, the Plaintiff suffered injury to the right side of the instant traffic accident (hereinafter “instant traffic accident”) due to the traffic accident that occurred at the front of C, located in Busan, Seo-gu, Busan (hereinafter “instant traffic accident”).

B. On March 21, 2016, upon the Plaintiff’s request, the Defendant: (a) determined the trial period for the Plaintiff on March 21, 2018 as of March 21, 2018; (b) determined the disability grade 6; and (c) determined the determination of the disability grade written at the time as of that time as follows: (a) “I am in the status in which the sports scope of the instant items has been reduced to not less than 75% but less than 90%; and (b) I am in need of re-determination after two years in consideration of the

There are some restrictions on the erosion movement due to damage to the right side of the outcome of the review and decision, but does not fall under the criteria to recognize disability.

In addition, it is stated that the scope of the movement of the right sprink is reduced by not less than 75%, but it is not recognized that the movement scope of the right sprink has decreased by not less than 75% in normal circumstances, or that the relocation of the sprink is complete.

C. On January 8, 2018, the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to set a disability grade, and the Defendant requested the National Pension Service to conduct a precise examination on the Plaintiff’s degree of disability, and used the results of the National Pension Service’s examination on March 16, 2018, thereby making a decision on the extra-degree of disability (hereinafter “instant disposition”) that the Plaintiff does not fall under the disability grade for the following reasons.

On April 26, 2018, the Plaintiff filed an objection against the determination of the above grade. Accordingly, the Defendant, upon having requested the National Pension Service to re-examine the level of disability of the Plaintiff, invoked the result of the above re-examination on June 14, 2018, and dismissed the Plaintiff’s objection for the following reasons.

In December 2, 2013, the review and decision opinion was made.