1. The action for retrial shall be dismissed;

2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the plaintiff.

purport, purport, and.

1. According to the records of this case, the following facts are recognized.

A. On December 21, 2013, while the Plaintiff was engaged in pipeline replacement work at the construction site of the clinic of Leecheon-si, Leecheon-si, the Plaintiff obtained approval for the completion of the Defendant’s medical treatment from the 3-party balance of the 3-party balance of the 3-party balance of the 3-party balance of the 3-party balance of the 4-party balance of the 4-party balance of the 4-party balance of the 3-party balance of the 4-party balance of the 3-party balance of the 4-party balance of the 3-party balance of the 3-party balance of the 3-party balance of the 3-party balance of the 3-party balance of the 3-party balance of the 3-party balance of the 3-party balance, “the 3-party balance of the 3-party balance of the 3-party balance of the 3-party balance,” “the 3-party balance of the 3-party balance of the 2-party balance of the 3-party balance.”

B. As a result of a review by the advisory society on September 5, 2014, the Defendant: (a) the scope of the Plaintiff’s third balance movement on the left-hand side falls under the Plaintiff’s 70 degrees of middle balance; (b) 30 degrees of neighboring part; and (c) 15 degrees of raw part; (b) although the scope of the fourth balance movement falls short of the disability grade of 70 degrees of middle balance; (c) 80 degrees of neighboring part; and (d) 30 degrees of raw part; and (c) the Plaintiff’s disability grade was determined by class 12 of class 12 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking the revocation of the instant disposition with this Court 2014Gudan16500, and the said court rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim on February 14, 2017 (hereinafter “the subject judgment on review”). D.

The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the above judgment and filed an appeal with Seoul High Court No. 2017Nu39398. However, the appellate court rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s appeal on July 14, 2017. The Plaintiff appealed with Supreme Court Decision 2017Du58380, but on November 23, 2017.