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

A. The Plaintiff’s spouse net B (CB, hereinafter “the deceased”) entered the Plaintiff Company D (hereinafter “D”) on November 29, 1996. From March 13, 2005 to May 31, 2006, the Plaintiff’s spouse was temporarily working in E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”) as an affiliated company, and was re-entered on June 1, 2006.

On April 1, 2009, the deceased was promoted to the chief of the department, and was promoted to the director on January 19, 2015.

B. From October 28, 2015 to October 18, 2015, the Deceased came to a meeting with D and E’s officers and employees from around 18:15, and came to a line between D and E’s officers and employees, and they were in a line of view.

In around 23:58 on the same day, the Deceased was found to have been used in the street, and was transferred to the Gangwon-do University of Dynam University (Seoul) Hospital located in the vicinity, but died on October 29, 2015 at around 00:33.

C. The autopsy of the National Institute of Scientific Investigation, who conducted the autopsy of the deceased, determined that the deceased’s private person was “scopic disease (scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scop

The Plaintiff asserted that proximate causal relation exists between the deceased’s work and death, and claimed the Defendant to pay survivors’ benefits and funeral expenses.

However, on November 16, 2016, the Defendant rendered a disposition of bereaved family benefits and funeral site expenses (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that there is no proximate causal relation between the deceased’s work and death.

E. The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed a request for an examination with the Defendant, but the Defendant dismissed the Plaintiff’s request for examination on May 8, 2017.

The Plaintiff filed a request for reexamination with the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Reexamination Committee, but the said Committee dismissed the Plaintiff’s request for reexamination on July 27, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is very serious in the process of carrying out a mixed work without supporting the work of calculating the unit price for the civil engineering sector and preparing the design budget.