1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On May 25, 2013, the Plaintiff: (a) obtained the medical care approval from the Defendant on May 25, 2013; (b) obtained the additional medical care approval from the Defendant as “Additional Injury Disease, the left-hand side and the bones of the bones of the hands-on on the left-hand side; and (c) completed the medical care approval on November 30, 2013.” (hereinafter “instant injury disease”); (d) obtained the additional medical care approval from the Defendant as “Additional Injury Disease, the left-hand side-hand side-hand side-hand side-hand part of the body of the materials stored in the cargo vehicle; and (e) completed the medical treatment on November 30, 2013.”

B. Accordingly, on December 10, 2013 and May 26, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a claim for disability benefits under Article 57 of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act (hereinafter “Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act”) with each of the Defendant, respectively, and the Defendant rendered a decision on the first and second disability benefit site payment on January 23, 2014 and May 29, 2014 on the ground that “the exercise scope and the degree of pain in the hands-out hall fall short of the standards for disability payment.”

C. The Plaintiff filed a request for review against the second disability benefit site determination, but was dismissed on August 19, 2014.

On January 21, 2015, the Plaintiff again claimed disability benefits to the Defendant, and the Defendant, on January 22, 2015, applied for the third disability benefit site determination (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

(iii) [founded grounds for recognition] unsatisfy, entry in Category B(1) to 4(s) and the purport of the whole pleadings;

2. Although the Plaintiff’s assertion of this case caused severe pains and knicks of left trees due to the Plaintiff’s instant wound, it was unlawful for the instant disposition in which disability benefits were not paid on the ground that the state of handout was inspected into the land and failed to meet the standards for disability payment.

3. The defendant's judgment on this safety defense shall be subject to objection.