The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On April 15, 1997, when the Plaintiff was on duty in Mro General Construction (hereinafter “the instant disaster”), the Plaintiff suffered from an accident on April 15, 1997 (hereinafter “the instant accident”). Around May 29, 1997, the Plaintiff entered the injury to the right side of Mro General Construction (hereinafter “the instant existing injury and disease”). On the other hand, the Defendant approved the instant disaster as an industrial accident and received treatment for the said injury and disease from the Defendant, etc., and then was judged as Grade 11 of the disability grade after the Plaintiff was determined as an industrial accident.

In addition, even around May 31, 2003, the plaintiff was suffering from an accident, and the shots, etc. of the left-hand slots were faced, and the plaintiff was approved as an industrial accident by the defendant on February 25, 2005.

B. On April 4, 2013, the Plaintiff claimed that the previous injury or disease in the instant case was aggravated or aggravated due to the instant disaster, and filed an application for additional medical care with the Defendant as the applicant injury or disease on April 4, 2013. However, on May 3, 2013, the Plaintiff received an application for non-approval of additional medical care (hereinafter “instant first disposition”). On May 13, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an application for additional medical care with the Defendant on the ground that the instant injury or disease was re-explosive and re-medical care (hereinafter “instant second disposition”). However, on May 31, 2013, the Plaintiff was subject to additional medical care on the ground that the Defendant was re-explosive and re-medical care (hereinafter “instant second disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2, 3, Eul evidence 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff asserted that the medical treatment of the previous injury and disease of this case caused by the disaster of this case was completed when the injury and disease of this case was merged with the injury and disease of this case. Since the existing injury and disease of this case aggravated, the medical care should be approved since it is necessary to provide active treatment.