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 July 28, 2014, the Plaintiff: (a) received the injury and disease of “the alleys of the alleys of the coordinate, No. 2, 3, 5, 5, and 4; and (b) received medical care until March 31, 2015 by obtaining approval from an occupational accident,” due to the crashing of the structure among gas pipes C in Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu.

B. On April 2, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a claim for disability benefits with the Defendant, and on April 15, 2015, the Defendant rendered the instant disposition to determine the final disability grade as Class 11, on the ground that the Plaintiff’s disability in the left-hand part (Class 12 subparag. 10), the chronic disability (Class 14 subparag. 10), and the Modified disability (Class 12 subparag. 16) pursuant to the left-hand part-hand part-hand part-hand part-hand part-hand part-hand part-hand part-hand part-hand part-hand part-hand part

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion falls under class 10 of the disability grade because the exercise scope of the left-hand table section of 50 degrees and the exercise limit of 1/2 or more compared to the normal range (110 degrees), and thus, the Plaintiff’s claim falls under class 10 of the disability grade, and should be determined as higher than the disability grade of the disposition of this case (Grade 11).

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;

C. Since there is no dispute over the Plaintiff’s change of the Plaintiff’s moving disability (No. 2) in the disability grade No. 12 subparag. 16, the issue of this case is the assessment of the Plaintiff’s movement restriction on the left-hand interests and the determination of the disability grade accordingly.

According to the statement in Eul evidence No. 2, although the plaintiff's main body is deemed to be a total of 50 degrees, the plaintiff's main body is to be restricted by more than 1/2 compared to 110 degrees of normal exercise, the plaintiff's main body is deemed to be limited by more than 1/2. The following circumstances, i.e., the defendant's disability review committee's advice at the defendant's disability review committee.