2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

A. B worked as a street cleaners belonging to the Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Office from January 1, 2000.

B around 04:40 on May 1, 2012, around 04:40, the taxi was faced with a traffic accident that was being driven by the taxi while being engaged in cleaning work on the side of the exit-gu roadway 12, Dong-dong 2, Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government.

(hereinafter “instant traffic accident”). (b)

B With the approval of medical care from the Defendant during the instant traffic accident from May 1, 2012 to January 23, 2014, the date of the instant traffic accident, was hospitalized and treated as “the blood transfusions from the outer border, the right revolving revolvings, the right revolvings, the right 11, and the catus 12,” due to the instant traffic accident.

C. B was laid down at home around 14:00 on February 3, 2014, and was discovered at around 16:0 on February 4, 2014, after being put into a dry field located in Dongducheon-si C in Dongducheon-si, 2.07km on February 4, 2014.

On September 1, 2014, the Plaintiff, the spouse of the deceased B (hereinafter “the deceased”), filed an application for the payment of survivors’ benefits and funeral expenses with the Defendant, but the Defendant, on September 16, 2014, notified the Plaintiff of the determination of survivors’ benefits and funeral funeral expenses on the ground that “In light of the Plaintiff’s medical opinion that “the instant traffic accident and death have no causal relationship, and that dementia cannot be a direct private person,” the Defendant, based on a comprehensive consideration of the medical opinion, etc., it is difficult to acknowledge a proximate causal relationship between the first approved branch of the deceased and the private person.”

(hereinafter referred to as the "disposition of Refusal of this case"). . [Grounds for recognition] without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 3, 6 through 10, Eul evidence 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the rejection disposition of this case is legitimate

(a) as shown in the Attachment of the relevant statutes;

B. The following facts do not conflict between the parties or may be acknowledged by taking into account the aforementioned evidence, Gap evidence Nos. 5, 11, and Eul evidence Nos. 2 through 5 (including the pertinent numbers), the results of the request for the examination of medical records by the Director of the Seoul Medical Center and the purport of the entire arguments.

1 The Deceased is at the time of his death as a DNA man.