1. The Defendant’s disposition of paying disability benefits to the Plaintiff on November 27, 2018 is revoked.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On March 20, 2018, the Plaintiff: (a) was diagnosed by the Yangchine Ethical Ethical Ethical Ethical Ethical Ethical Ethical Ethical Ethical Ethical Ethical Ethical Ethical Ethical Ethical Ethical Ethical Ethical Ethical Ethical Ethical Ethical Ethical Ethical Ethical Ethical Ethical Ethical Ethical Est

B. On November 27, 2018, the Defendant rendered a decision on the payment of disability benefit site (hereinafter “instant disposition”) against the Plaintiff on the ground that “the Plaintiff’s 53dB on the left-hand left-hand and right-hand 70.8dB as a result of the review of the Integrated Review Council of the Daejeon Regional Headquarters, but both both are influences including low-frequency and high-frequency, and it is difficult to view it as a noise difficult to view it as a noise distress.”

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry in Gap evidence 1 and 3 (including branch numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion was exposed to more than 85dB noise in the course of discharging coal, digging, etc. for about 5 years and 10 months in CY, etc. In light of the following: (a) both sides of the Plaintiff were exposed to the noise of more than 85dB; (b) as a result of the Plaintiff’s positive test, it is highly serious in 4,00 Hz around the 4,00 Hz; (c) as a result of the National Health Nutrition Survey, there was a sudden loss on the Plaintiff compared to the average loss of not less than 70 years old as a result of the national health nutrition survey; and (d) the Plaintiff did not have any other symptoms and diseases related to the instant upper branch; and (b) the disease of this case is either a noise difficult hearing or becomes worse by the noise of the elderly, the Defendant’s disposition on different premise

(b) If it is intended to recognize a disease due to an occupational reason stipulated in Article 5 subparagraph 1 of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act, the disease shall be on duty.