1. On October 21, 2016, the Defendant’s revocation of the disposition of additional injury and disease approval against the Plaintiff.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On August 31, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an additional injury on the part of the Defendant with respect to “an accident falling on a bridge for the installation of an electric cable (hereinafter “instant accident”) that was killed in the abscopon of the scopon of the scopon of the scopon of the scopon, the scopon of the scopon, the scopon of the scopon, and the scopon of the scopon of the scopon of the scopon of the scopon, the scopon of the scopon of the scopon, the scopon of the scopon of the sc

B. On October 21, 2016, the Defendant rendered a disposition to the Plaintiff to refuse to file an additional injury or disease application on the ground that “other detailed conical signboards are clearly changing the stimulity of the conical signboards between the 5th and the 1th 1,000s, and such changes are shown to the existing chronic path, such as the detailed unknown facts, and they are included in the cluorically approved disease” (hereinafter “instant disposition”). The Defendant did not make any separate disposition as to the cluoral cluoral base and tension, and other specified conical signboards (hereinafter “the instant additional disease”).

C. Although the Plaintiff filed a request for examination with the Defendant, the Plaintiff was dismissed, and the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Reexamination Committee filed a request for reexamination, but was dismissed.

[Reasons for Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3 (including each number), Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the legitimacy of the disposition

A. Before the Plaintiff’s assertion, the additional disease of this case occurred after the accident of this case, and the additional disease of this case was diagnosed. Thus, despite the existence of proximate causal relation between the additional disease of this case and the accident of this case, the Defendant’s disposition of this case, which was judged on a different premise, is unlawful.

B. Determination 1 of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act is an additional injury or disease.