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 4, 2014, the Plaintiff was a person who became a production employee and worked as a production employee. On March 4, 2014, the Plaintiff was transferred to an apparatus that, on the part of the vocational health center rehabilitation treatment facilities in the workplace, the Plaintiff is obliged to fix and take a attitude to satisfing the satch while taking a physical treatment. The Plaintiff was treated as the “patf escape certificate No. 5-6 in the instant accident” at C Hospital as the “patf escape certificate No. 5-6 in the 5th century,” the “vatf escape certificate”, the “fatch escape certificate and tension with the bones of the bones,” the “cerebre and tension of the bones of the bones,” the “cerebrum satch”, and the “hatch satch.”

B. On December 11, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application for medical care benefits with the Defendant. On February 2, 2015, the Defendant rendered the instant application for medical care benefits to the Defendant. On February 2, 2015, the Defendant disposed of the instant application for medical care benefits on the ground that the Plaintiff’s duty was not high on the part of the Plaintiff, on the ground that the Plaintiff’s physical burden was not high on the part of the 5-6 side of the instant accident, “hump escape,” “hump escape,” “humphe and tension,” “humphe of the pleat,” and “humphe of the pleat,” were related to the instant accident. However, the Plaintiff’s duty was merely confirmed on the part of the Plaintiff’s cryp signboard No. 5-6 on the cump of the cump. 1 on the cump of the cump.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 5, Eul evidence 5 and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the legitimacy of the disposition

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion has been working in B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter, Nonparty Co., Ltd.) for a period of 26 years since 1988, and was engaged in engine assembly activities at engine assembly teams, hybrid teams, and hexane teams. From around 2010, the Plaintiff was engaged in business of dismantling and assembling wheel chairss from engine 1 set-off teams, and the Plaintiff was engaged in work.