1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. At around 08:20 on September 14, 201, the Plaintiff was an employee employed by Dongcheon Power Co., Ltd., and was performing the work of cutting down trees by using a kack rolling stock vehicle (second strings), and was under medical care with the Defendant’s approval, such as “the instant accident (hereinafter “the instant accident”), which was caused by an accident that fell from approximately 1.4m high at a level of approximately KRW 1.4m, such as a 300 g weight, etc., cut down from the 1.4m weight, etc. (hereinafter “the instant accident”). The Plaintiff was under medical care with the Defendant’s approval.

B. On March 7, 2012, the Plaintiff filed an additional injury and disease against the Defendant, alleging that the “savinal salt spons, No. 4, and No. 5” occurred due to the instant accident.

C. On March 19, 2012, the Defendant approved the Plaintiff to receive medical care with respect to the “definite salt,” and rendered a disposition to deny medical care with respect to the “profinite 4 and 5 confinites escape certificate” (hereinafter “existing additional injury”).

The Plaintiff filed a request for review of the aforementioned disposition of non-approval for medical care for the foregoing additional injury and disease (hereinafter “existing disposition”), but the said request was dismissed on May 30, 2012.

E. Accordingly, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking revocation of the previous disposition with the Seoul Administrative Court 2012Gudan16278, and the said court rendered a judgment on April 12, 2013 that “the revocation of the existing disposition” was “the revocation of the previous disposition.”

F. The Defendant dissatisfied with the above judgment and appealed as Seoul High Court 2013Nu12845, and the above court rendered a judgment on April 10, 2014 that “the proximate causal relation between the instant accident and the existing additional injury and the injury and disease cannot be acknowledged (However, the Plaintiff’s escape certificate of upcoming the 6-7 trends is likely to be recognized as proximate causal relation with the instant accident, and the Plaintiff’s claim is dismissed.” The above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

G. The Plaintiff’s objection around April 15, 2014.