1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On November 26, 1986, while working as an employee in the Bupyeong Factory Korea M&M, the Plaintiff was at the time when carrying parts stuff (12 km per 12 km) in the said factory on November 23, 201, and was at the time of the accident (hereinafter “instant accident”) due to the wind of the parts stuffing on the corner of the parts stuffing on the wind that the part stuffs fall off, and was at the time of the first medical treatment on January 9, 2012 after obtaining the approval of the first medical treatment as an injury of the “satisfe salted on the left side” (hereinafter “first approved injury”).

B. On March 30, 2012, the Plaintiff filed an application for medical care benefits by asserting that the additional injury (hereinafter “instant injury”) called “satisfying satchitis” occurred due to the instant accident, but the Defendant rendered a disposition of additional injury and disease approval on the ground that there is no proximate causal relation between the instant accident and the instant injury and the instant injury.

Although the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant to revoke the revocation of the additional recognition of the injury or disease, and lost at the first instance court (Seoul Administrative Court 2012Gudan21393), the Plaintiff was sentenced to the revocation of the additional recognition of the injury or disease of this case on the ground that the injury or disease of this case was caused by the first recognition in the course of treating the injury or disease in the first instance (Seoul High Court 2013Nu10191), and on March 13, 2014 from the final appeal (Supreme Court 2013Du24815) to the final appeal (Supreme Court 2013Du24815). The judgment became final and conclusive.

(hereinafter “former case”). On May 8, 2014, the Defendant approved the additional injury and disease of the instant injury and disease.

C. On June 20, 2014, the Plaintiff submitted a medical treatment plan to the Defendant on the basis of the doctor’s opinion that “the instant injury and disease need to be observed during physical treatment and continuously due to lack of pain control.” However, the Defendant, on July 3, 2014, submitted a medical treatment plan (from March 13, 2014 to June 9, 2014).