logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2020.05.07 2018구단74245
추가상병불승인처분취소
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. By April 2013, the Plaintiff (B) served in the 28-year mining center and performed the work, such as coal, digging, etc.

B. After retirement, the Plaintiff was diagnosed as “Seong-gun, Yangyang-gu, the left-hand Rad Rad Rad-gun, the left-hand Rad Rad-gun, the upper-hand Rad-man, the upper-hand Rad-man, the upper-hand lad-in salt, and the Defendant’s medical treatment approval as of March 6, 2015, and the additional injury and disease approval as of January 22, 2016, and the medical treatment was granted from June 23, 2014 to October 31, 2017.

C. On the other hand, on October 13, 2017, the Plaintiff was diagnosed as “the extreme part-time salt and part-wave fever, the upper right-hand falls, and the credit infection (hereinafter “the instant injury and disease”),” and applied for additional injury and disease to the Defendant.

On January 11, 2018, the Defendant rendered a decision to grant additional injury and disease relief (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff on the ground that “as a result of the deliberation by the advisory society, it is difficult to recognize the proximate causal relation with disasters in consideration of the medical care conditions and age” on the ground that the Plaintiff “as a result of the deliberation by the advisory council, it is extremely full-time and partial high-speed, right-hand, and high-speed, the right-hand, and it is difficult to

E. Although the Plaintiff filed a request for examination with the Defendant, the Defendant dismissed the Plaintiff’s request for examination on April 27, 2018, and the Plaintiff filed a request for reexamination with the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Reexamination Committee, but was also dismissed on August 10, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff worked for a long period of time as a light source and carried out a strong burden on the superior branch.

As a result, the occurrence of each of the instant injury and disease has become worse or worse due to nature, and in particular, the occurrence of additional injury and disease has occurred under the supervision of the right-hand side, which is the father of the injury and the need for additional medical care.

Therefore, each of the instant injury and disease is the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act.

arrow