1. The Defendant’s disposition of disability ratings rendered against the Plaintiff on May 15, 2013 is revoked.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On October 30, 1997, the Plaintiff was working as a teacher of B elementary school, and was able to return home to the Plaintiff, taking part in the evaluation conference to prepare for the sports competition for students with the swimming pool located in Asan-si and took part in the said elementary school, and was faced with the shock of the vehicle driven by D in the above swimming pool parking lot (hereinafter “the instant accident”), and was subject to medical treatment for official duties by the Defendant as to “the 4-5 conical signboard escape certificate, and the pathal root of the pathal disease” in the above swimming pool.

B. Since then, on December 28, 2001, the Plaintiff complained of the vertebox, etc., and was diagnosed by E Hospital as “vertebrate division certificate, vertebrate vertebrate febrate febrate, vertebrate febrate stability, and vertebrate febrate febrate febrate.” On February 20, 2002 at the above hospital, the Plaintiff was administered with vertebrate febrate (hereinafter “the instant operation”).

C. After retirement on August 31, 2008, the Plaintiff filed an application for disability pension with the Defendant on April 1, 2010 due to the instant accident (hereinafter “previous disposition”). On June 1, 2010, the Defendant issued a disposition against the Plaintiff on the ground that “The above injury or disease was excluded from the approval for medical care for the traffic accident occurred on April 4, 2005, which could not be considered as having a proximate causal relation with the official duty,” on the ground that “The above injury or disease cannot be paid to the Plaintiff on the ground that there was a proximate causal relation with the official duty” (hereinafter “previous disposition”).

Accordingly, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit to seek revocation of the previous disposition, and the first instance court (Seoul Administrative Court 201Gudan4643) rejected the plaintiff's claim, but the second instance court (Seoul High Court 201Nu46257) is reasonable to deem that there is a proximate causal relation with the official duty.