1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff was appointed as the police assigned for special guard on August 27, 2009 and served in the Office of Culture and Gazette, etc. as of August 27, 2009.

① On May 15, 2017, the Plaintiff: (a) performed the process of cutting the scarf of the scarf of the scarf of the scarf in the place where the steel flowers was created; (b) on the grounds that the Plaintiff was diagnosed by the “scarf disability accompanied by the scarf’s disease certificate”; and (c) on July 27, 2017, performed the work of attaching publicity posters and distributing the scarfs to the “C” at the Japanese members of the scarf’s day on July 27, 2017, on the ground that he was diagnosed by the “4-5 conical signboard escape certificate”; (d) the “4-5 conical signboard escape certificate”; and (e) the Defendant applied for the approval of medical treatment on August 14, 2017.

B. On October 11, 2017, the Defendant rendered a decision not to approve an application for approval of medical care for official duties against each of the instant injury and disease (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the grounds that it is difficult to deem that the Plaintiff applied for approval of medical care for official duties, on the grounds that it is difficult to deem that the instant injury and disease were caused due to the business performed by the Plaintiff, on the grounds that it is difficult to deem that the pertinent “porizontal signboard disability accompanied by the number of disease and disease”, “climatic salt and tension,” “pactical signboard escape certificate,” and “Article 4-5 (hereinafter “pact and disease of this case”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 5 (including branch numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion continues to perform various duties with heavy physical burden after being appointed as the police assigned for special guard B, and as a result, the occurrence or aggravation of each of the diseases of this case was caused. Therefore, there is a proximate causal relation between official duties performed by the Plaintiff and the injury and disease of this case.

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

(b) fact of recognition 1.