logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.06.07 2018누76653
요양불승인처분취소청구
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. The grounds for admitting the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance are as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, in addition to the following parts and the parts to be determined additionally under Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Part 2, Chapters 16 through 18 of the judgment of the first instance shall be followed as follows.

“. The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed a request for review with the Defendant. However, the Defendant dismissed the Plaintiff’s request for review on the ground that “it is difficult to recognize a proximate causal relationship with the Plaintiff’s duties on the ground that it is difficult to recognize that the Plaintiff’s request for reexamination was exposed to continuous and repeated physical burden duties, such as that the Plaintiff may have a burden on some shoulders during the course of performing his/her duties, but considering the overall period of exposure to physical burden and the degree of burden burden, etc., it is difficult to deem that the Plaintiff’s request for reexamination is too difficult to recognize a proximate causal relationship with the Plaintiff’s duties.” D) The Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Review Committee filed a request for reexamination with the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Review Committee on the ground that the Plaintiff’s request for reexamination is difficult to view that the Plaintiff’s request for reexamination was made based on an objective outcome of change in his/her age group on the same basis as the Plaintiff’s request for reexamination without observing the Plaintiff’s medical image data, and thus, it is difficult to view that the Plaintiff’s request for reexamination of his/her duty has been made more worse.

arrow