1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On March 21, 2006, the Plaintiff suffered from the injury of the part of the lower court, which was the lower court, due to the accident that occurred at the site B constructed by Korea New Technology Co., Ltd., and on July 27, 2007, the Plaintiff applied for the medical care on October 4, 2007, and was decided to approve the medical care from March 27, 2006 to April 23, 2006.

After November 1, 2007, the Plaintiff applied for extension of the period of medical care. The Defendant extended the period on November 20, 2007 by September 30, 2006.

B. The Plaintiff applied for temporary layoff benefits from September 1, 2006 to September 30, 2006 on April 15, 2011, but was not paid on the ground that the amount of KRW 1,562,480, which occurred during the above period, was deducted from other damages (five hundred and fifty million won agreed with the employer).

C. The Plaintiff filed an application for temporary layoff benefits from September 5, 2006 to July 26, 2007, but the Defendant already deducted KRW 1,562,480 from September 1, 2006 to September 30, 2006, which was caused by the Plaintiff’s application for temporary layoff benefits on April 8, 201, from other damages (an agreement with the employer). The remainder of the right to receive temporary layoff benefits was determined on September 23, 2016 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

Therefore, the Plaintiff filed a request for review with the Korea Workers' Compensation and Welfare Service, but dismissed on February 13, 2017, and the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Review Committee filed a request for reexamination to the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Review Committee, but was dismissed on April 20, 2017.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 1, 2, Eul 1 to 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the legitimacy of the disposition

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion did not inform the Defendant of the fact that the medical care was approved on October 4, 2007, and the Plaintiff became aware of it only during the period of 2011. As such, the Plaintiff was unable to file an application for temporary layoff benefits. Therefore, the instant disposition on the ground that the extinctive prescription has expired should be revoked unfairly.