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 December 18, 2015, the Plaintiff asserted that, as a delivery source affiliated with Es.S. Korea Co., Ltd., the Plaintiff was trying to avoid a vehicle with a spony drive on the 110-lane 46,000 road of Gangnam-gu Seoul (hereinafter “instant accident”), and that as a result, the Plaintiff suffered from “the sponty in the right sponty, the right sponty, and the half-month sponty on the right sponty outside of the spony,” and applied for the Defendant to grant the medical care approval.

B. On March 7, 2016, the Defendant approved the medical care on the right slot box, but made a non-approval disposition (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the instant accident did not have a causal relationship with the instant accident due to the fall short of the right chain (hereinafter “instant injury”).

C. Accordingly, the Plaintiff filed a request for examination to the Defendant, but was dismissed on August 25, 2016.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 2, 3, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff did not have any slot and any pain or disease related thereto before the instant accident occurred. The instant injury was caused or aggravated due to the instant accident.

The instant disposition that did not recognize the proximate causal relationship between the work and the injury and disease of this case is unlawful.

B. 1) The "occupational accident" under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act refers to an employee's injury, disease, disability or death caused by an occupational reason, and in order to be recognized as a occupational accident, the accident in question is caused by the occupational accident, and there is a proximate causal relation between the occupational accident and the accident. In this case, the causal relation between the worker's accident and the occupational accident must be proved by the claimant. 2) In this case, the entry in the evidence No. 4.