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 21, 2017, the Plaintiff entered the Ulsan Factory B, Inc., and applied for medical care benefits to the Defendant on April 21, 2017, when he/she performed the maintenance work of exporting vehicles, etc. on or around February 2017.

B. However, on June 30, 2017, the Defendant rendered a disposition to grant medical care non-approval (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff according to the determination of the Busan Occupational Disease Determination Committee that “the proximate causal relation between the Plaintiff’s work branch of this case and the Plaintiff is not recognized.”

C. The Plaintiff appealed and filed a petition for reexamination, but was dismissed.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, 4, and 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is about 26 years that the Plaintiff was in charge of the vehicle maintenance work at the Ulsan Factory Co., Ltd., and the maintenance work performed using the electric tools or water tools is the work that imposes a considerable burden on the shoulder.

Therefore, even though the injury or disease of this case was caused by the Plaintiff’s work, the disposition of this case on a different premise is unlawful.

B. Determination 1) The occupational accident under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act refers to a disease caused by the worker’s occupational accident during his/her work, which is caused by the worker’s occupational accident. Therefore, there should be causation between the occupational and the disease. The causal relationship must be proved by the party asserting it. Even if it is not necessarily required to prove clearly in medical and natural science, a proximate causal relation between the occupational and the disease should be determined by considering all circumstances (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Du725, Feb. 5, 2002).