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 July 18, 2012, the Plaintiff filed an application for the approval of additional injury to the Defendant on May 25, 2016, for the approval of the first left-hand bridge (hereinafter “instant injury”) of the combined fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluor.

B. On September 28, 2016, the Defendant issued a non-approval disposition of the instant injury and disease (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff on the ground that “The instant injury and disease is not objectively confirmed or the causal relationship between the existing recognition branch and the instant injury and disease cannot be recognized.”

C. On January 18, 2017, the Plaintiff appealed and filed a request for reexamination with the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Reexamination Committee on May 11, 2017, but a ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s request was issued on July 13, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 3, 4, 7, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5 through 8, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. Although it is evident that the Plaintiff’s assertion was confirmed that the occurrence of the injury or disease of this case and there was causation between the existing injury or disease of this case, the disposition in this case was unlawful.

B. (1) Article 49 of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act provides that where medical care is necessary due to a new disease caused by additional discovery of an injury or disease caused by an existing occupational accident or by an injury or disease caused by an existing occupational accident, an application for medical care benefits for “additional injury or disease” can be filed.

(2) Therefore, the following circumstances, which are acknowledged by the purport of the entire pleadings, are indicated in the health room, Eul evidence Nos. 4 and 5, the results of physical appraisal and fact inquiry about the B Hospital Head of this Court, and ①.