1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, which cited the judgment of the court of first instance, is the same as the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the following judgment is added to

Therefore, it is accepted in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

[Supplementary determination] The Plaintiff asserts that, during the period of the instant medical treatment plan application, medical care should be approved because the symptoms of the instant injury and disease have not been fixed even during the remainder of the period excluding January 31, 2011 through October 4, 2011, during which the Defendant approved the medical care. Medical care benefits under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act should be determined on the basis of whether there is symptoms only arising out of a disaster, rather than mere comparison of the disability conditions before and after the accident, and whether the medical care is needed to expect at least the effect of the symptoms (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Du6919, Aug. 20, 2009). However, even if an employee was approved of medical care from the Defendant due to an occupational accident, the Plaintiff’s assertion that medical care was needed only to prevent the aggravation of the symptoms of the relevant injury and disease, which constitutes grounds for completion of medical care (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Du13101, Sept. 210, 2019).

2. The plaintiff's claim for conclusion shall be dismissed on the ground that the plaintiff's claim is without merit.

The judgment of the court of first instance is justifiable in conclusion as above.

Therefore, the plaintiff's appeal is without merit.