1. On June 29, 2017, the Defendant’s new type No. 1 title of the Complex M&D No. 1 among the disposition of additional injury and disease approval issued against the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On July 1, 2016, the Plaintiff, while driving on the off-to-land and carrying out delivery duties, was going beyond the road while avoiding collision with the illegal U-turned vehicle. Accordingly, the Plaintiff received the approval for medical care from the Defendant, by suffering from “the e-mailed salt of the right side, the e-mailed salt, the e-mailed salt, the e-mailed salt, the e-mailed salt, the e-mailed salt, the e-mailed e-mail, the

B. On June 13, 2017, while receiving medical care for the above injury and disease, the Plaintiff filed an additional application for medical care for injury and disease with the Defendant regarding “Type 1, Class 1, and salivities (hereinafter “instant additional injury and disease”), saliva, and saliva of the combined injury and disease-related disease” (hereinafter “instant additional injury and disease”).

C. On June 29, 2017, the Defendant rendered a non-approval of the above additional injury and disease application (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff on the ground that “the Plaintiff’s symptoms fall short of the criteria for the diagnosis of the combined injury and the pain of the deceased cannot be deemed as the final diagnosis name with respect to the symptoms.”

The Plaintiff, who was dissatisfied with the instant disposition, filed a request for review to the Defendant but dismissed.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 6, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the legitimacy of the disposition

A. The plaintiff's assertion shows one or more symptoms among three categories of symptoms according to the standard for diagnosis in the complex Madic Madic Madic Madic Madic Madic Madic Madic Madic Madic Madic Madic.

Nevertheless, the Defendant’s determination that the Plaintiff’s additional injury and disease was insufficient in the instant disposition was unlawful.

(Plaintiff does not dispute the part of the documentary evidence of the instant disposition). (B)

Judgment

In full view of the records of Gap evidence Nos. 3 through 8 (including paper numbers) and the purport of the entire arguments as a result of the request for the examination of medical records to the old Hospital of Korea University.