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 a person who has performed duties, such as supporting supporting supporting half-way, eating during the mid-time period, and washing, in an internal restaurant (hereinafter “instant cafeteria”) located in B from March 2, 2014.

B. On June 5, 2015, the Plaintiff’s accident, around 13:35, 2014, is called the accident of this case, where: (a) the Plaintiff, while carrying a food board at the instant cafeteria, was accumulated, is away from the food board he/she was accumulated, and the Plaintiff’s right generated, etc. falls off on the corner of the food board that falls short of the Plaintiff’s right generated, etc.; and (b) the Plaintiff’s accident is called the accident of this case.

(B) The injury to a sacriffym, post-congenital sacriffymosis (the second third third third third third third third third third third third third third third third third third third third third third third third, hereinafter referred to as “the injury to the sacriffym”) is so called the instant injury.

(2) On July 3, 2015, the Defendant filed an application for medical care benefits with the Defendant asserting that he/she sustained injury, but the Defendant rendered a decision not to approve the Plaintiff’s above application (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the instant injury was caused by the Plaintiff’s existing disease (hereinafter “urine”) and the causal relationship with the instant accident cannot be recognized.

C. On October 26, 2015, the Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed a request for examination with the Defendant. The Defendant rejected the request for examination on the ground that the occurrence of the instant accident is unclear, and that the Plaintiff’s damage to the right-hand side was caused by the instant accident, considering it as a water surface, and it cannot be deemed that the Plaintiff’s damage to the right-hand side of the Plaintiff was caused by the instant accident.

The Plaintiff filed a request for reexamination with the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Reexamination Committee, but the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Reexamination Committee was on April 7, 2016.

For the same reasons as described in the paragraph, the above request for review was dismissed.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without any dispute, Gap's 1, 2, 3, Eul's 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff alleged by the parties: the plaintiff.