1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is an employee belonging to the Ginjin Management Co., Ltd., and is in charge of the security guards’ service from October 4, 2013 to the Jinjin-gu Gyeongdong Apartment-gu (hereinafter “Dongmun-gu apartment”).

B. On January 20, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an initial medical care benefit application with the Defendant that recognized five injury on the left-hand side (hereinafter “instant injury”) as an occupational accident, and on February 5, 2014, the Defendant rejected the Plaintiff’s first application for medical care benefits (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C. The Plaintiff filed a request for review on the instant disposition, but the Defendant dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim on April 15, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Evidence Nos. 5, Eul Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. On November 11, 2013, while the Plaintiff was working as a security guard of the East-gu apartment, the Plaintiff suffered the instant injury by breaking the iron plate in order to walk a separate collection box for the apartment recycling, thereby causing the instant injury, and resulting in an diversative operation, and thus, the instant injury ought to be recognized as an occupational accident.

B. Facts of recognition 1) The Plaintiff was under continuous medical treatment from around December 2006 to around November 201, 2013, such as “urine disease, chronic shock from the skin, deculative shock, and pressure pressure.” 2) The Plaintiff was under medical treatment with 5 metratitis on November 16, 2013 to December 16, 2013, as well as 201.2) The Plaintiff was under medical treatment with 5 metratitis on the left-hand side from C’s clinic located in Seoyangyang-gu, Yangyang-gu, Yangyang-si, and 5 metratitis during the period from December 2, 2013 to December 10, 2013, and was subject to treatment with 5 metratitis in the left-hand body from D E during the period from November 2, 2014 to 10 of the same month, and was subject to the Plaintiff’s 13rdum 2, 2014.