1. The Defendant’s disposition of paying disability benefits to the Plaintiff on February 19, 2020 shall be revoked.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On May 31, 2019, Plaintiff (B) was diagnosed by both sides of the “protruding disability” (hereinafter “the instant injury and disease”). The Plaintiff was exposed to noise in the course of landing, blasting, etc. at the construction site and caused the instant injury and disease by being exposed to noise.

The Defendant filed an application for the payment of disability benefits (hereinafter “instant application”) with the Defendant.

B. On February 19, 2020, the Defendant rendered a decision on disability benefit site payment against the Plaintiff on the ground that “The Plaintiff’s special diagnosis results show each of the nephalopic chronism in both sides, but the Plaintiff’s noise exposure period objectively confirmed does not constitute the requirement that a worker, as provided in relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, would have been exposed to more than three consecutive years in more than 85dB (hereinafter “instant disposition”). The Defendant did not have any dispute over the ground for recognition, the evidence Nos. 1 through 4, and the purport of the entire pleadings.”

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion constitutes occupational diseases caused by excessive noise exposure while the Plaintiff’s landing and blasting work as construction workers.

(b) The details of the relevant statutes are as shown in the attached statutes.

(c)

Judgment

1) In order to recognize an occupational disease as a result of an industrial accident compensation insurance policy under Article 5 subparag. 1 of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act (hereinafter “Industrial Accident Insurance Act”), the pertinent disease was caused by the occupational accident and has a substantial relation to the occupational disease and must be attested by the party asserting that the disease was caused by the occupational accident.

However, whether there is a substantial causal relationship between work and disaster shall be determined on the basis of the health and physical conditions of the worker concerned, not the average person. The degree of proof does not necessarily have to be clearly proved by medical and natural science, but there is a substantial causal relationship between work and accident, considering all the circumstances.

(2) if any.