1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On August 1, 1993, the Plaintiff was diagnosed as an employee of the Korea Electric Power Corporation (hereinafter “instant accident”) on the ground of “the 15ms below the 15ms below the 5ms below the 5ths below the 5ths below the 5ths below the 5ths below the 5ths below the 5ths below the 5ths under the 5ths below the 5ths under the 5ths below the 5ths under the influence of the repair work.”

B. The Plaintiff received medical care from the Defendant with respect to the instant accident, which was recognized as an occupational accident, and the level of escape from the 4-5 protruding signboards was generated due to an additional injury, and around May 8, 1996, the Plaintiff was subject to the removal of conical signboards between 4-5 and the 4-5 conical injury.

C. After the surgery, the Plaintiff complained of the symptoms of the lower half of the Plaintiff, and on May 4, 200, the Defendant recognized this, and issued a disposition on May 4, 200 to determine the invalidity grade of class 2 subparag. 5 (a person in need of nursing from time to time due to a significant obstacle to the function or mental function of the neurosis)

(hereinafter “instant original disposition”) D.

In the process of examining the termination of the period of the medical care for the Plaintiff around 2016, the Defendant determined that the Plaintiff, at the time of the original disposition of this case, had deceiving the medical institution and the Defendant even though there was no symptoms, such as low-income paralysis, because the Plaintiff was sufficiently able to do so, and based on the aforementioned determination, the Defendant revoked the original disposition of this case on October 7, 2016, and rendered a new disposition of the approval for the medical care with the content of cancelling the treatment after the medical care of the Plaintiff until September 30, 2016

In addition, on December 1, 2016, the Defendant rendered a disposition to collect unjust enrichment of KRW 297,646,800 from the Plaintiff following the revocation of the original disposition in this case.

(hereinafter referred to as "the disposition of this case" is referred to as "the disposition of this case". 【The ground for recognition of this case' is without any dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 4, 14, and 15, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff met the second half of the original disposition around the time of the instant case.