1. On September 11, 2015, the Defendant’s first disposition of medical care and non-approval of temporary layoff benefits against the Plaintiff shall be revoked.

2...

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The plaintiff is a director in charge of the business operation of the Incorporated Agricultural Company B in the following year.

On January 20, 2015, the Plaintiff, who was a business partner of the non-party company, was contacted with the business owner of the non-party company, to bring about drugs ordered, and driving the vehicle and return to the stock farm after receiving drugs from the incheon Livestock Pharmaceutical Drugs, and delivered them to the stock farm. In addition, the traffic accident, along with the vehicle, falling into the virtue below the road (hereinafter referred to as the “accident”), was occurred.

As a result, the plaintiff suffered from the injury of the mouths (openness), spacions (openness), complete spacions ( complete spacings), and spacings of pacia, without any spacing of water level.

B. On August 12, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an application for medical care benefits and temporary layoff benefits with the Defendant, asserting that such an accident occurred on the way that he/she returned to the Defendant after completing the duties requested by Nonparty Company’s business partners.

However, on September 11, 2015, the Defendant rendered a decision not to grant medical care benefits and temporary disability compensation benefits (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that “the Plaintiff asserted that it was an occupational accident that occurred in the course of performing the duties related to the feed-sale business, but the delivery of medicines required for the stock farm is not considered as the Plaintiff’s main duties, and that it responded to the request of the stock farm under the Plaintiff’s arbitrary judgment, so the instant disaster cannot be recognized as an occupational accident.”

C. On April 7, 2016, the Plaintiff filed a request for examination against the Plaintiff, but the Defendant rendered a decision to dismiss the Plaintiff’s request for examination. The Plaintiff filed a request for reexamination, but the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Reexamination Committee rendered a ruling to dismiss the Plaintiff’s request for reexamination on September 19, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 3, 16 evidence, Eul evidence 9, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff, who is the business member of the non-party company that sells the general mixture feed of the plaintiff's assertion for the stock farm, is a business partner.