1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is a worker who belongs to the Co., Ltd. and worked at the C Multi-Family Housing Construction Site (hereinafter “instant construction site”).

B. On July 15, 2018, around 10:30, the Plaintiff was at the construction site of this case, and the Plaintiff was faced with an accident where a fluor house, which was placed on the floor, was cut from the ground, and a fluor and a fluor of a fluor, was shocked on the left side of the signal receiver (hereinafter “instant accident”).

C. On October 11, 2018, the Plaintiff filed an application for medical care benefits with the Defendant on the diagnosis of the D Hospital located in Seongbuk-gu, Sungnam-si, as “(i) tearing, tearing, or complete tearing, extreme tear or complete heat, the left-hand tearing, or complete heat, the left-hand, and ③ shoulder shocking power, and the left-hand side of the shoulder (hereinafter referred to as “instant injury and disease”).

Accordingly, on October 23, 2018, the Defendant rendered a disposition to grant medical care benefit payment (hereinafter “instant disposition”) against the Plaintiff on the ground that there is no proximate causal link between the instant accident and the instant injury and disease according to the medical opinion of the advisory opinion that “a serious decline in the extreme part time in the MRI shows a view to the extreme decline, and a long-term marcing feed.”

After that, the Plaintiff was diagnosed by D Hospital as the “surine sark for the left side” and applied for medical care benefits to the Defendant on November 28, 2018, and the Defendant approved on December 7, 2018.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 3, Eul evidence 2 (including branch numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. Although the instant wound occurred to the Plaintiff due to the instant accident, the gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Defendant considered the instant wound as the king and proximate causal relation between the instant accident and the instant wound.