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 May 17, 2013, when the Plaintiff was employed as an employee of the Party C located in Daegu-gu Month B, the Plaintiff was faced with an accident that felled at a height of at least 2.5 meters at a height of at least 2.5 meters.

B. On July 1, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an application for medical care with respect to “alleyone” on the said accident and was recognized as an industrial accident. The medical care was completed as of November 30, 2013, and was determined as disability 14 on the ground of Alley negotisis, as of December 9, 2013.

C. The Plaintiff filed an additional injury and injury application inasmuch as the said accident caused the “saved saves” or “saves”, but the Defendant, on February 5, 2014, deemed it reasonable to view it as an overall save change rather than an injury caused by a one-time accident, and thus, issued a non-approval disposition (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the application for additional injury and injury is not recognized as a causal relationship with the initial accident, and the Plaintiff appealed against the request for reexamination, but was dismissed on July 7, 2014.

On the other hand, even after the completion of treatment, the Plaintiff filed an application for additional medical care due to severe pains at the time of chest, urstal, thale, thale, brue, and urging of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the

E. In addition, on September 22, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application for additional injury and disease against the symptoms of “neinal sexual bronism,” but was issued a non-approval disposition by the Defendant on the ground that “the first approved injury and disease have no medical causal relationship” (hereinafter “third disposition”).

In full view of the evidence of this case, the purport of the judgment of class 14 disability on December 9, 2013 is stated as follows: (a) “Ashes aggregate after the extraction of aggregate, but the pain remains.”