1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of disposition;

A. On February 27, 2008, the Plaintiff was a Korean Chinese national who entered the Republic of Korea on February 27, 2008, and was engaged in laundry assistance work by joining the company B on March 9, 2011, and was diagnosed as an emergency room after being transferred to an emergency room on July 1, 2011 (hereinafter “the instant injury”). On February 13, 2012, the Plaintiff claimed an occupational accident and filed an application for medical care benefits with the Defendant.

B. On May 18, 2012, the Defendant issued a non-approval disposition on the ground that the occupational course or stress, which could cause the instant injury, was not verified. The Plaintiff filed a petition for an examination and reexamination, but received a ruling of rejection from the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Reexamination Committee on June 21, 2013.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap 2, 4, 6 (including virtual number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. Although the Plaintiff’s assertion was proved by blood pressure to the Plaintiff, it was normally managed after entry into Korea, and the holidays prior to three months prior to the outbreak of the instant injury were in excess of a single frame, and the stress arising from the working environment, such as poor working environment, human relations in the workplace, delayed payment of wages, etc., led to the above injury and disease. Thus, it should be viewed as occupational accidents.

B. (1) The "occupational accident" under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act refers to the injury, disease, disability or death of an employee caused by an occupational reason, and in order to be recognized as a occupational accident, the accident is caused by the occupational accident, and there is a proximate causal relation between the work and the accident. In this case, the causal relation between the worker's accident and the work should be proved by the claimant.

The existence of a causal relationship is not an average person, but a judgment is made on the basis of the health and physical conditions of the worker concerned, and the degree of proof of a causal relationship is essential.