1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On March 3, 1982, the Plaintiff, who became a member of the two Industries Ltd. and worked in the middle control plant, filed a claim for disability benefits to the Defendant on June 1, 2016 on the ground that the noise level difficulties and symptoms of the second name were diagnosed as a result of the health examination.

B. On January 24, 2017, the Defendant rendered a disposition to determine the Plaintiff’s disability grade as class 14 subparag. 1 (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that “I shall not hear the small cancellation rate at a distance of at least 1 meter from the equisitic chronological chronological chronological chronological chronological chronological chronological chronological chronological chron, and constitutes a person who could not hear the small cancellation rate at a distance of at least 1 meter.”

C. On April 27, 2017, the Plaintiff appealed and filed a request for review, but the decision was rendered by the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Review Committee to dismiss the request, and the Plaintiff filed a request for review, but the decision was made by the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Review Committee dismissed the request on June 23, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including branch numbers), Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, 6, 7, 11, and 12, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The plaintiff's other hospital alleged that there was an interest to the plaintiff, and that the physical examination appraisal cannot be confirmed by a typhical method as a typhism, and that the plaintiff is confirmed by the imprisonism, a major person of the interest to the plaintiff. Thus, the plaintiff should recognize the outbreak of this title and take the disability grade of class 12, but the disposition of this case based on the premise that the plaintiff did not have an interest to the plaintiff is unlawful.

(b) Entry in the attached Form of relevant statutes;

C. (1) Determination (1) Article 57(2) of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act and Article 53(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act shall be set at class 14, on the one hand, a person who is unable to be aware of the small cancellation rate at a distance of at least one ear in Annex 6.