beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On January 20, 1994, while working as an employee belonging to the Samhee Industry, the Plaintiff received medical treatment and completed medical treatment by means of injury, such as “the ice and sulververging sule,” while transporting the steel cable tubes at the construction site of 38 km up on the shoulder (hereinafter “the primary accident of this case”). On May 27, 1997, the Plaintiff received additional injury from an injury, and completed medical treatment until July 31, 1998, with the approval of additional medical care.
Since then, the Plaintiff received disability benefits from the Defendant after receiving the disability grade No. 15 (a person whose remaining labor service is substantially limited due to the function or mental function of the Seongbuk system).
B. At around 22:00 on October 2, 2005, the Plaintiff was engaged in the work of 250 Quaker cable (not less than 5cm in diameter) on the floor at the transformation room of 3rd floor underground floor constructed by SAm Co., Ltd. at the construction site, and the Plaintiff started work and finished the treatment on May 12, 2006, after obtaining the Defendant’s approval of medical treatment as an injury on the upper part of the string installed at a height of 1.5 meters in the string of the string, with the left part of the string, and the accident going beyond the floor (hereinafter “the second accident in this case”).
C. On the other hand, on March 20, 2006, the Plaintiff filed an application for the approval of additional injury and injury from the second accident of the instant case, which caused the occurrence of an “ex post facto stress disorder” with the Defendant on May 2, 2006, but was not approved by the Defendant (hereinafter “former Disposition 1”), and on August 23, 2006, the Plaintiff changed the name of the injury and injury to the “Ex Post Facto Change to the name of the injury and injury and applied for the re-treatment and additional injury from the Defendant. However, on September 1, 2006, the Plaintiff was not approved again by the Defendant.
hereinafter referred to as "second previous disposition".
The plaintiff is an administrative litigation seeking the revocation of the disposition.