beta
Text
1. Of the instant lawsuit, the part seeking revocation of the determination of a disability grade as of December 17, 2012 shall be dismissed.
2. The plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Details of disposition;
A. On October 24, 201, at around 08:40 on October 24, 201, the Plaintiff, an employee of the Human Disaster Industry Co., Ltd., was cut off from the work process at an Amymm in the Anmymmmmm (hereinafter “the instant injury and disease”), and was diagnosed of salt, tension, and tension, etc. of the upper part of the upper part, the left part of the thalm, and the salm and tension of the salm (hereinafter “the instant injury and disease”). At that time, the Plaintiff provided medical treatment by October 4, 2012 with the Defendant’s medical treatment approval.
B. After the completion of medical care, the Plaintiff filed a claim for disability benefits with the Defendant. On December 17, 2012, the Defendant: (a) recognized that class 9 of class 12 (as to the Plaintiff’s left-hand hand part of class 100 (as to the remaining part of class 1 of class 3 joints of part 1 of part 3 joints of part 1 of part 3 joints of part 1) and class 9 of class 12 (as to the remaining part of part 9 of part 3 joints of part 3 joints of part 1 of part 1 of part 3 joints of part 3 joints of part 1 of part 3 joints of part 1 of part 3 joints of part 3 joints of part 3 joints of part 3 joints of part 1); (b) determined that the scope of movement falls short of the disability grade under the top-hand part 280; and notified the Plaintiff that the final grade was adjusted to be the disability grade 11.
hereinafter referred to as "first disposition".
C) Accordingly, unlike the first disposition on the left-hand hand on January 30, 2013, the Plaintiff’s request for examination was defective, and the Defendant decided to revoke the first disposition on the left-hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand over the left-hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand over at least 1/2 of the normal scope. The first disposition was revoked after adjusting the final grade.
Accordingly, on February 5, 2013, the defendant recognized the disability grade as class 9 to the plaintiff.