1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Basic facts

A. The parties concerned employed the Plaintiff as a worker, and on May 23, 201, the Plaintiff engaged in cutting and printing of steel bars using drypers.

(hereinafter “instant work”). (b)

(1) On May 23, 2011, the Plaintiff complained of the Defendant that he/she had been friendly to the Defendant, and the Plaintiff was given medical treatment by moving to the Busan University Hospital via the Incheon National University Hospital. (2) On May 24, 2011, the Plaintiff received an operation at the Busan National University Hospital on the friendly guide materials and each string, and received an operation at the Busan National University Hospital on May 24, 201. On July 15, 2011, the Plaintiff received an operation at the Busan National University Hospital on the ophyth of the ophyan, and the diagnosis name was an internal trauma, external trauma, the ophyth of the inside, the ophyth of the inside, the ophyth of the inside, and the heat of the ophyth of the

(hereinafter “the instant injury”). C.

On August 11, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application for medical care benefits with the Korea Workers' Compensation and Welfare Service, but received non-approval on January 2, 2015 on the ground that the Plaintiff was an industrial accident insurance-related business establishment with less than one regular employee.

【Fact-finding without a dispute over the basis of recognition, Gap’s evidence Nos. 1, 2, 7 through 11 (including the number of branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul’s evidence Nos. 3 and 4, the fact-finding results on the Busan Northern Vice-Governor of the Party, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff exceeded the boundaries of the Domins and confirmed the status of the work of this case, and sustained the injury of this case as the Gap self-stamper in the process of confirming the status of the work.

The defendant, as the plaintiff's employer, was negligent in inspecting the condition of the drys machine and supervising, supervising, and educating workers to prevent the occurrence of such accidents, and thereby, the plaintiff suffered the injury of this case. The defendant is KRW 5 million for medical expenses, and KRW 5 million for medical expenses incurred due to the aftermath disability and KRW 5 million for the daily income.