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

A. As from February 9, 1981, the deceased B (hereinafter “the deceased”) worked for the Gojin-si Corporation and approved the medical care with Eulphal typhism and its multi-chronological chronological typhism, multiple chronological typhism (hereinafter “instant approved disease”). From that time, the deceased was hospitalized in the hospital of the Republic of Korea National University Hospital, etc. to that time until the death of the deceased.

B. On October 22, 2014, the Deceased died on or around 04:40, and the death diagnosis written by D medical specialists of the department of home department at the Macheon National University affiliated with the University of Macheon National University (hereinafter “Macheon National University”) (hereinafter “Macheon National University”) who is the principal doctor of the Deceased is indicated as a direct death, pulmonary typology, a middle executive secretary, multi-sex brain typhism, and ephical typhismism, a prior director.

C. On November 18, 2014, the Plaintiff, a wife of the Deceased, asserted that the death of the Deceased constituted an occupational accident and claimed for the payment of survivors’ benefits and funeral expenses to the Defendant.

On December 16, 2014, the Defendant rendered a decision on the family's benefits and funeral expenses against the Plaintiff on the ground that "the deceased's direct death could not find records, and even if the cause of the death of the deceased is closed, the waste convergence is infected with infectious disease, so the causal relationship with the approved branch of the instant case can be recognized only in special cases. Therefore, the causal relationship with the approved branch of the instant case is the medical opinion of the adviser that the causal relationship with the approved branch of the instant case is not recognized."

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). [Grounds for recognition] The Disposition in this case is without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 3, 4, Eul evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 2-1 and Eul evidence No. 2-2, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The purport of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the immunity was significantly lowered due to the Plaintiff’s treatment under the instant approved injury, which constitutes occupational accidents for a long time.

In addition, from six months before death, the existing multi-cerebral typism has deteriorated.