1. On September 30, 2013, the Defendant revoked the Defendant’s disposition of non-approval for medical care benefits granted to the Plaintiff.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On January 6, 2007, the Plaintiff was subject to an accident on March 31, 2013 (hereinafter “instant accident”) in which the right fingers down on the slot machines, while entering the D factory located in Vietnam’s R&D (hereinafter “instant factory”) after leaving the factory on April 20, 2010 and performing duties such as quality control, technical assistance, etc., while having been engaged in the business (hereinafter “instant accident”).

B. The Plaintiff returned to the next day and was hospitalized in the New Village Detailed Hospital, and was diagnosed as “the disease of this case” (hereinafter “each of the disease of this case”), and was diagnosed as “the well-fluoral and 2, 3, 4, 5 salvine salvine salvine salvine and salvine salvine salvine salkes, the right side 2, 3, 4, 5 salvine salm salvine salvine salm salkes, and the right right side salvine salm salm salm

C. On June 20, 2013, the Plaintiff asserted that each of the instant injury and disease was occupational accidents and applied for medical care to the Defendant. However, on September 30, 2013, the Defendant rejected the application on the ground that “the Plaintiff is exempt from the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act because it was an industrial accident compensation insurance policyholder under the special case for the overseas temporary agency workers” (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's evidence 1, Gap's evidence 2 (including a paper number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion is an employee of C, who was engaged in his duties in the factory of this case abroad under the direction of the employer, and each of the diseases of this case occurred, and thus, the defendant's disposition of this case on different premise is unlawful, even though it constitutes the subject of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act.

(b) The details of the relevant statutes are as shown in the attached statutes.

C. (i) On January 6, 2007, the Plaintiff entered as a producer of household materials, B, a producer of household materials, and works for production.