1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. From March 12, 2010 to March 12, 2010, the Plaintiff was working for a construction site in the Gyeongnam-gun building C (hereinafter “instant construction”). On April 11, 2010, when dismantling a retaining wall concrete installed, the Plaintiff fell on the ground, and was treated under the Defendant’s approval for medical care, and was under the Defendant’s medical care on January 31, 2012.

The Defendant recognized the Plaintiff’s total wage of 30 days from March 12, 2010 to April 10, 2010, which began to work at the site of the instant construction, as KRW 1,750,00 (daily KRW 70,000 x the actual working days x 25 days) and accepted the Plaintiff’s application for exemption from the Plaintiff’s ordinary labor coefficient pursuant to Article 24(2) of the Enforcement Decree of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act, and determined the Plaintiff’s average wage per day as KRW 58,333.33 ( KRW 1,750,000 ± 30 days) and based on this, paid the Plaintiff’s temporary layoff benefits (payment period on April 11, 2010 to January 31, 2012) and disability benefits (class 10).

On April 10, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an application for the correction of the average wage with the purport that the Plaintiff’s room and board cost (60,000 won per day) borne by B during work at the instant construction site are remuneration for the Plaintiff’s work, and should be included in the total amount of wages subject to average wage calculation. The Defendant rejected the application on May 7, 2015.

The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant seeking the revocation of the foregoing non-approval disposition with the Changwon District Court 2015Gudan524.

In this lawsuit, the court recommended the mediation that the defendant revoke the above non-approval disposition ex officio on the ground that the plaintiff's room and board cost (30,000 won per day of work) borne by B constitutes wages as remuneration for work and should be included in the total amount of wages subject to the calculation of average wages, and thus the defendant should re-calculated the above non-approval disposition. The defendant accepted it and accepted it on November 17, 2015.