1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. While the Plaintiff was engaged in the waste collection business on September 14, 2003, the Plaintiff was shocked by sucking waste of heavy source as sucked in rain.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). (b)

As of December 1, 2003, the Plaintiff was diagnosed of the escape symptoms of the c-4, and No. 4-5, because of the symptoms continued after the accident of this case and the left-hand side, the Plaintiff was diagnosed of the escape symptoms of the c-4, and No. 3-4, and No. 4-5, which were conducted by the Defendant on December 2, 2003 (hereinafter “the instant operation”).

C. The Plaintiff filed an application for medical care benefits with the Korea Workers' Compensation and Welfare Service for the escape from the end of the 3-4 and the 4-5 summary. The Korea Workers' Compensation and Welfare Service recognized the escape from the end of the 3-4 summary phase as an occupational accident and approved the medical care. However, with respect to the escape from the end of the 4-5 summary phase, the Ministry of Health and Welfare issued a disposition of non-approval for medical care on the ground that there was no causal relationship with the disaster due to the sudden change in spine.

After that, the plaintiff filed an application for approval of additional injury and disease with the Korea Labor Welfare Corporation for the 4-5th century escape certificate and the vertebrate ex post facto death certificate. However, the Korea Labor Welfare Corporation notified the Seoul Northern Vice-Governor as the Seoul Northern Vice-Governor that the escape certificate of the 4-5th century was notified from the Seoul Northern Vice-Governor to March 22, 2004 without approval. However, the vertebrate escape group approved the medical care by recognizing the causal relationship with the disaster.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 3, 4, and 8, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff alleged that he had been unable to walk properly for more than 10 years since the operation of this case, and had constant pains and symptoms. This is due to the negligence of the operation of this case committed by the defendant.

Therefore, the defendant is the property that the plaintiff suffered due to the instant surgery.