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 January 3, 1964 to August 10, 1989, the Korea Coal Corporation performed duties, such as collecting coal and mechanical repair, in the Seongbuk Mining Center, and filed a claim for disability benefits with the Defendant upon the diagnosis of the Yangchine Machine Distress on February 2, 2016.

B. On September 9, 2016, the Defendant rendered a disposition on disability benefit site payment (hereinafter “instant disposition”) against the Plaintiff on the ground that “the cause of the Plaintiff’s failure to meet the standards for returning home on both sides of the Plaintiff is considered to be the senior citizens’ hearing.”

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3 (including virtual numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion was exposed to long-term noise while performing his duties such as collecting coal and mechanical repair at a noise-based shop for about 25 years, and caused symptoms of loss of luculity. Thus, the Plaintiff’s paculic climatic climatic disorder was caused by such noise.

I would like to say.

Therefore, the defendant's disposition of this case on a different premise is unlawful.

B. In light of the fact that the Plaintiff worked at a workplace from January 3, 1964 to August 10, 1989 with a considerable amount of noise of about 25 years from the date of the Plaintiff’s work, there is no dispute between the parties, and according to the result of the court’s entrustment of medical record on the director of an Asian University Hospital, if the Plaintiff worked for 25 hours a day for 8 hours a day in an environment with a highest noise of at least 110dB as alleged by the Plaintiff, there is a high risk of suffering from noise, and the fact that the medical record appraisal determined that the above noise was affected by the Plaintiff’s occurrence of a certain amount of noise.

However, the following circumstances, i.e., the noise-related hearing room, which is acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the descriptions Nos. 1 and 2 of the evidence and the overall purport of the arguments as a result of the request for the examination of the medical records to the head of the Asia University Hospital.