유족급여및장의비부지급처분취소
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
1. In light of the evidence adopted and examined by the court of first instance, the grounds alleged in the judgment of the court of first instance are not significantly different from the allegations in the court of first instance, and in light of the fact that the private person of the deceased is unclear and that the actions immediately before the death of the deceased are private acts and thus it is difficult to recognize the relationship of work, the judgment of the court of first instance that the death of the deceased did not constitute occupational accidents on the ground that there is no evidence to acknowledge proximate causal relation between the deceased’s work and the death, is justifiable (as alleged in the court of first instance, even if it is acknowledged to some extent that the height of the 9th floor balcony which the deceased fell at the time of the accident of this case does not meet the standards stipulated in the Enforcement Decree of the Building Act, it is difficult to judge that the accident of this case occurred due to defects in the facilities or management negligence in the situation where the work identity of the deceased is not recognized, as otherwise alleged by the plaintiff, and the reasons for citing the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of second instance as to the accident of this case are insufficient.
2. As such, the conclusion of the first instance judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim is justifiable, and the Plaintiff’s appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.