1. The Defendant’s decision on collection of KRW 55,605,540 against the Plaintiff on April 15, 2014 is revoked.

2...

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On April 6, 199, the Plaintiff was faced with an accident falling at the construction site on the part of April 6, 199 (hereinafter referred to as the “accident in this case”), and suffered from injury, such as “brain an alley and two alley-alleyssis, cerebral cerebralopsis, cerebralopacy, climatic disorder, and climatic personality personality disorder,” and received medical care approval from the Defendant until August 31, 2003.

B. On October 11, 2003, the defendant deemed that the plaintiff's disability grade of the plaintiff constitutes "a person who is not able to engage in labor for the remaining life due to a significant impediment to the function or mental function of the neurosis" and determined the plaintiff's disability grade as class 3 (hereinafter "the first disability grade of this case"). Accordingly, the plaintiff received a disability compensation annuity from November 1, 2003.

C. Around 2013, the Defendant conducted a reinspection on whether the Plaintiff’s disability grade was appropriate, based on the Plaintiff’s answer to the literature with B living together with the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff, and the medical records and records before and after the first determination of the instant disability grade, and deemed that the determination of the Plaintiff’s disability grade was erroneous at the time of the first determination of the instant disability grade, on April 15, 2014, the first determination of the instant disability grade was revoked ex officio. On the other hand, the Plaintiff re-determinations the Plaintiff’s disability grade under class 7 subparag. 4 (hereinafter the re-determination of this case), and collects KRW 5,605,540, out of the disability benefits already paid pursuant to Article 84(1) of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act, to the extent that three years have not passed since the statute of limitations expired (hereinafter the collection disposition of this case).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 4, Eul 1, 2, 9, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. Plaintiff’s assertion 1) At the time of determining the first disability grade with respect to the instant disposition, the Plaintiff’s disability status at the time of determining the instant disability grade No. 3 (the function or mental function of the neurosis).