1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On March 13, 2017, the Plaintiff was an employee of the Plaintiff Company B (hereinafter “B”), who was diagnosed by C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) in the middle-term factory in the middle-term factory in the middle-term factory of the factory site, and filed an application for medical care benefits with the Defendant (hereinafter “instant application”) after undergoing a diagnosis of “the scambling disc fever (e.g. 7 to 1) and other specified developments (e., e., g., e., g., e., e., g., e., e., g., e., g., e., e., g., e., g., g., e., g., g., g., e., g., g., e., g., e., g., e., e., e., k.

B. The Defendant’s “MRI’s change of side signboards between the 7st to the 1st scarde of the MRI is without causation with a disaster due to a chronic bottle, but there is no causal link with a disaster. However, there is no causal link with a disaster. In light of the result of the deliberation by the advisory society, “The causal relation is recognized with a disaster” that “the scare’s base and tension, the head of the 7th to the 1st scare’s base of the MRI’s base of growth, the scare’s scarke, the head’s scare’s string, the scare’s scare’s base of growth, and the scare’s scare’s scarf’s base of growth,” the Defendant’s medical treatment is approved for “the scarf’s base of scarf’s base of scarf’s head, the knene’s base of development” (hereinafter “approval”).

(C) The Plaintiff filed a request for review with the Defendant, but the Defendant rendered a decision to dismiss the Plaintiff’s request for review. [The grounds for recognition are as follows: Gap’s evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, and 5, and Eul’s evidence No. 3, and the purport of the entire pleadings.]

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful