1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. From April 10, 1970, the Plaintiff was employed by Nonparty 1 Co., Ltd. as non-party 1 driver from around April 10, 1970, and was working in the field of package projects for the expansion of national highways in Gyeyang-do. On March 25, 1975, the Plaintiff repaired the engine of the non-indicted 1, while working in the field of package projects for the expansion of national highways in Gyeyang-do, and was used as an engine, and was subjected to an accident under his supervision and approved for medical care by the Defendant, and completed medical care around September 1976.

At this time, the plaintiff did not have applied or received disability benefits to the defendant.

B. Upon the aggravation of the desire around November 13, 1996, the Plaintiff concluded re-treatment on June 30, 2012 with the Defendant’s approval for re-treatment, and filed a claim for disability benefits with the Defendant on November 13, 2012, stating that “the Plaintiff was diagnosed as a permanent disability with the complete finishing cost due to the damage of the volume”.

C. On December 27, 2012, the Defendant rendered the instant disposition to pay disability benefits to the Plaintiff on the ground that, at the time of completion of the Plaintiff’s initial medical care, the disability level at the time of completion of the additional medical care falls under class 1 subparag. 8 (the person who becomes unable to use the two legs completely), the disability grade at the time of completion of the initial medical care is not the same and more aggravated disability. However, the instant disposition was rendered to pay disability benefits on the ground that the extinctive prescription period after the lapse of three years from the date of termination of the first medical care was completed by claiming disability benefits and claiming disability benefits.

The Plaintiff filed a review on the instant disposition, but was dismissed on March 13, 2014.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of evidence Nos. 2-1, 3-1, and 3-2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff asserts that the disposition of this case is unlawful, asserting that the following grounds for the claim are selectively asserted. A.

When the plaintiff completes the first medical treatment, it is not possible to receive a disability grade decision or an expert's disability diagnosis.