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

A. The Plaintiff is the spouse of B (C) and B entered “D” around September 1, 201 and was in charge of the head of the material assembly team and the overall affairs of the production department.

나. B은 2015. 1. 15. 16:30경 사업장 내에서 금형 조립 작업을 하던 중 두통을 호소하며 공장 내 2층 휴게실로 올라갔다가 17:50경 동료근로자에 의해 의식이 없는 상태로 발견되어 병원으로 옮겨져 치료를 받았으나, 2015. 1. 19. 15:05경 ㈎ 직접사인 : 뇌부종, ㈐ 선행사인 : 뇌출혈, 뇌실내출혈의 사인으로 사망하였다

(hereinafter referred to as “the deceased”). (c)

On December 21, 2015, the Plaintiff asserted that the deceased’s death constitutes an occupational accident, and filed a claim for the payment of survivors’ benefits and funeral expenses with the Defendant. However, the Defendant rendered a disposition on February 12, 2016 as well as a site-based disposition of survivors’ benefits and funeral funeral expenses (hereinafter “disposition of this case”) on the ground of the result of the deliberation by the Committee for Determination of Minor Diseases that “it is difficult to recognize a proximate causal relationship between the applicant branches and the duties, on the ground that the special occupational burden factors (e.g., rapid changes in the working environment, sudden increase in the workload, excessive workload, stress, etc.) are not verified in the scope of causing the applicant’s death in the previous duties.”

[Grounds for Recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 and 2 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. To make entries in the attached statutes concerned;

3. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s work hours were chronicly excessive from around 2012 to November 2014. After November 2014, the work hours decreased compared to those prior to the transfer, but still exceeded the number of other companies.

The deceased is promoted to the person in charge of the production department, and the workload and burden are increased compared to those.