logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2016.06.10 2015구단52633
요양승인처분 취소
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. The Plaintiff subcontracted to Hayang Construction Co., Ltd., Hayang-Jakyang Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “the instant construction”) of the Jinyang-Jinyang 112 island distance 112 main works of Jinyang-Jinyang Railroad 6 sections.

B. From September 21, 2014, A, who was employed as a daily worker in Hanam Construction Co., Ltd. and worked as a steel hole at the construction site of this case. On October 8, 2014, A filed an application for medical care benefits with the Defendant by asserting that, around October 8, 2014, the fingers suffered from the fluoral fright and the 5th century-1,000 square meters for the instant accident, and that he/she was suffering from the fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral escape.

C. On December 8, 2014, the Defendant approved the medical care approval (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that there was a work that imposes a burden on the duty in the position, and that there was recognition of proximate causal relation with the duty, on the grounds that the fact that the Defendant had been repeatedly and repeatedly performed the iron bars for a long time (hereinafter “instant disposition”), but, on the ground that the 5th Y-1,000 MDR escape certificate was not well-known to have a proximate causal pressure, and thus, the medical care rejection was not granted on the ground that there was no proximate causal pressure in the MRI.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. Considering that there is no evidence to prove that the injury and disease occurred at the construction site of this case other than the Plaintiff’s statement A, the circumstance of the injury and disease is unclear, and that the injury and disease appears to have occurred due to the lusium in the past, there is no proximate causal relation between the duties of the injury and disease of this case.

Nevertheless, the instant disposition that recognized the injury or disease of this case as an occupational disease is unlawful.

B. A in charge of the fact of recognition 1 and circumstances involving accidents have been on duty in the construction site of light-speed rail from May 2006 to September 2014.

A shall be from September 21, 2014 to the Jinyang-si.

arrow