logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2015.09.18 2014구단58153
요양불승인처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On March 31, 2012, while working as a shop in Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, the Plaintiff complained of two copies of the dialogues with the company’s Dong fees and was diagnosed as “brain dystyposis, left-hand traffic electric connection fever” (hereinafter “instant injury and disease”), and applied for medical care benefits to the Defendant on April 30, 2012, but the Defendant was not approved on June 26, 2012.

B. On September 26, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application again for medical care benefits with the Defendant. On October 16, 2014, the Defendant rendered a disposition not to grant medical care (hereinafter “instant disposition”) against the Plaintiff on the ground that “The instant injury and disease is observed by cerebrovascular fever, and there is no proof of excessive increase in work performance or rapid change in work and stress on the part of the Plaintiff, and it is difficult to recognize the relevance to the Plaintiff’s work due to the occurrence of a natural marism of the previous disease.”

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, 6, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The working hours of 12 weeks prior to the occurrence of the Plaintiff’s assertion of the instant injury exceeded average 60 hours per week, and the hours of night work whose physical and mental burden is aggravated compared to the weekly working hours are not shorter than 30% out of the entire working hours.

In addition, the plaintiff repeated the work to load heavy weight, such as heavy weight, and since the injury or disease in this case occurred due to such work or the existing disease has aggravated beyond the natural progress speed, the disposition in this case made on a different premise by the defendant is unlawful.

B. (1) The Plaintiff entered the company B on July 1, 2005 and worked as the store leader, and purchased the goods purchase, sale, and store management at the time of the occurrence of the instant injury.

arrow