1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. On December 27, 2012, the Defendant rendered a disposition to pay disability benefits to the Plaintiff.

1. The following facts do not conflict between the parties, or can be acknowledged by comprehensively taking into account the following facts: Gap evidence 2-1 to 4, Gap evidence 3-1, 2, Gap evidence 4, Eul evidence 6, Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 2-1, 2, Eul evidence 4, Eul evidence 6-8, Eul evidence 10, and Eul evidence 10.

On April 10, 1970, the Plaintiff, who was employed as a public building operator from around April 10, 1970 to work in the National Highway Distribution Site of Gyeonggi-do, was employed as a public building company, and was working in the National Highway Construction Site of Gyeyang-do. On March 25, 1975, the Plaintiff was using the engine and was approved for medical care by the Defendant (hereinafter “first medical care”) due to an accident in which spine and long-term has occurred under the influence of the engine, and the medical care was terminated on September 1976.

At this time, the plaintiff did not apply or receive disability benefits to the defendant.

② The first insurance benefit ledger for the benefits paid by the Defendant at the time of the first medical care (hereinafter “the first medical care ledger”) remains, and there is a transferred register prepared by the Plaintiff at around 1975 at the time of the Plaintiff’s transfer to the Government Office (hereinafter “instant transfer register”). The approved injury and medical care period are as follows: The first medical pressure table, 12 ple and 1, and 2 tereculation, and the first medical care period: the first medical pressure table, 12 ple and 1, and 2 teculation, and the second medical care period of the Plaintiff’s first medical care (hereinafter “the instant injury and disease”): The medical care period of the Plaintiff’s first medical care (hereinafter “instant injury and disease”): on March 25, 1975 through September 25, 1975 (185 days of hospitalization of the relevant hospital affiliated with the hospital affiliated with the hospital affiliated with the hospital affiliated with the hospital affiliated with the hospital affiliated with the hospital affiliated with the hospital affiliated with the hospital affiliated with the hospital”).

B. On November 13, 1996, the Plaintiff got approval for re-treatment from the Defendant (hereinafter “re-treatment”) and completed the re-treatment on June 30, 2012, due to the aggravation of the desire for re-treatment.

C. The Defendant’s invalidity grade decision and the Plaintiff’s receipt of injury-disease compensation annuity (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) were in the period of additional medical care.