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 October 26, 1985, the Plaintiff became an incorporated foundation for about 23 years from October 26, 1985, and performed its duties as an operator for the following five years.

B. On December 20, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an application for medical care with the Defendant on December 20, 2013, alleging that the Plaintiff had caused a burden on the background during the repeated performance of his/her duties, and that there was an injury or disease of the conical signboard escape certificate No. 4-5 in the light of the background, No. 5-6 in the light of the background (hereinafter “instant injury or disease”).

On this basis, the Defendant rendered a decision on February 7, 2014 on non-approval (hereinafter “instant disposition”) based on the result of the deliberation by the Gwangju Regional Disease Determination Committee, stating that “The applicant’s duty, period of service, medical record, video data, doctor’s opinion, advisory opinion, etc. were examined, and the applicant’s injury and disease is confirmed, but it is not deemed to have a proximate causal relationship between the duties and the injury and disease, as it is insufficient to view it as an ordinary burden, considering the content of work, strength, etc.”

C. On the other hand, the Plaintiff filed a request for review, which was dismissed, and the Plaintiff filed a request for review, but was dismissed on November 20, 2014.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 4, 5, and 6, the purport of the whole pleading

2. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the Plaintiff continued to move the foundation, which accounts for a broad space in the course of performing the duties of the Foundation and continued to operate the machinery without a certain number of rooms, and thus, the Plaintiff had no choice but to have been engaged in the operation of the machinery by continuously putting the string of the machinery, and even while performing the duties of the operator, excessive pressure was placed in light of the trend

As a result, there is a proximate causal relation between the plaintiff's work and the injury and disease of this case since the injury and disease of this case occurred.

Nevertheless, the defendant's disposition of this case which judged that the work of the plaintiff is not a business that imposes a burden on the situation.