1. The Defendant’s disposition to pay disability benefits to the Plaintiff on March 16, 2016 is revoked.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. From February 21, 1989 to July 1, 2001, the Plaintiff worked as a Chinese mining company, etc. for about 12 years from the Hansung Mining Corporation, etc.

B. On March 7, 2009, the Plaintiff registered as a disabled person with the verification of the disability grade 5 in accordance with the Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities on March 11, 2009, after undergoing the three-time examination of Mali-Mari-Mari-Mari-Mari-Mari-Mari-Mari-Mari-Mari-Mari-Mari-Mari-Mari-Mari-Mari-Mari-Mari-Mari-Mari-Mari-Mari-Mari-Mari

C. On August 5, 2015, the Plaintiff was diagnosed by the Nanchina Medical Center, “B,” and filed a claim for disability benefits for the instant injury and disease with the Defendant on February 2, 2016, after receiving the diagnosis from the Nanchina Medical Center.

On March 16, 2016, the Defendant rendered a decision on site pay (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff on the ground that “The Plaintiff’s claim for disability benefit was terminated by prescription for three years from the date of leaving the noise workplace ( July 2, 2001) and the date of diagnosis by the Noise Agency ( March 7, 2009), respectively, in accordance with relevant statutes and the work process standards.”

E. The Plaintiff filed a request for examination with the Defendant, but received a decision of dismissal from the Defendant, and again filed a request for reexamination to the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Reexamination Committee, but received a decision of dismissal from the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Reexamination Committee.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 3 (including additional numbers), Eul evidence 1 to 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s claim for disability benefits (1) is that the Defendant’s claim for disability benefits is specifically arising only when the Defendant makes a decision on the payment of disability benefits. Thus, in a situation where there is no decision on the payment of the Defendant, the claim for disability benefits

(2) Even in the absence of the Defendant’s decision to pay disability benefits, the extinctive prescription may be viewed as the starting point of reckoning the right to claim disability benefits.