유족급여 및 장의비청구 부지급처분 취소
1. The disposition that the Defendant rendered to the Plaintiff on March 30, 2018 as bereaved family benefits and funeral site pay shall be revoked.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On June 29, 1987, the deceased B (hereinafter “the deceased”) filed an application for additional injury with the Defendant on January 14, 2016, where he/she had worked in D, due to occupational accidents involving the 1st century, nephal damage, sub-comfortosis, neanosis, he/she bath, he/she he/she he/she he/she was under medical treatment with the approval of the Defendant (hereinafter “the first injury”). On January 14, 2016, the deceased filed an application for additional injury with the Defendant for a closed-faculous flachissis (hereinafter “the second injury”). On November 15, 2016, the deceased obtained the approval of an additional injury and disease from the Defendant.
C. On September 27, 2017, the Deceased showed symptoms of falling consciousness, and was diagnosed as a result of brain CT shooting that the blood transfusion occurred to the right side of the deceased.
After that, on December 14, 2017, the Deceased died as a multi-patch long-term care unit, which was hospitalized in a convalescent hospital.
The Plaintiff, who is the deceased’s child, claimed bereaved family benefits and funeral expenses to the Defendant.
However, on March 30, 2018, the Defendant issued a disposition of bereaved family's benefits and funeral site pay (hereinafter "the instant disposition") to the Plaintiff on the ground that "the deceased's fluor was caused by an acute fluoral transfusion, resulting in death, and caused death in a mixed status. The causal relationship between the previous branch and the death is not recognized. The acute fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 through 9 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. On the following grounds, the Plaintiff’s assertion that the causal relationship between the death of the deceased on the first and second upper parts, which is the death of the deceased on the part of the deceased on the grounds of the following, the instant disposition that was determined on a different premise should be revoked as unlawful.
1. The defendant suffered from the death of the deceased due to his blood transfusion.