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 March 1, 1995, the Plaintiff joined the Daewoo Shipbuilding Marine Co., Ltd., and carried out the work of mtebrusing and pipeline iceing, installing various kinds of instruments, and folding. The Plaintiff filed an application for medical care benefits and temporary layoff benefits with the Defendant on March 20, 2017, on the ground that “The escape certificate of conical signboards between the 4-5 of the 4th century, the escape certificate of conical signboards, the revolving electric power failure and the diameters, the right table EL, the right table, and the right frame outside the left table.”

B. On June 16, 2017, the Defendant issued a disposition to grant medical care non-approval (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff on the ground that “The escape certificate of a conical signboard between the 4-5th parallels among the applicants’ injury and that the instant injury and disease are not clearly known that the status of the injury and disease is not obvious and that there is no proximate causal relation with his/her duties” (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C. The Plaintiff filed a request for review with the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Review Committee, but a ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s request was rendered on October 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 5 and 6, the whole purport of the pleading

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The plaintiff's assertion was conducted for 23 years as a shoulder burden and inappropriate person. Accordingly, the disease of this case occurred, and the plaintiff's doctor presented his opinion that the disease of this case is recognized as the outbreak of the disease of this case. The disposition of this case which denied causation with the duty of this case is unlawful.

B. (1) In order to be recognized as a disaster due to an occupational reason under the Industrial Accident Insurance Act, there must be a proximate causal relation between the business and the disaster, as well as the occupational reason. In this case, the causal relation between the worker's business and the accident should be proved by the claimant, and Supreme Court Decision 96Nu1726 Decided February 25, 197.