유족급여및장의비부지급처분취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. The Plaintiff’s spouse B (C birth, hereinafter “the deceased”) worked in the Gijin Mining Center from November 21, 1962 to July 28, 1976, and from the Jijin Mining Center from June 13, 1985 to January 25, 1986.
B. As a result of the intensive diagnosis conducted by the Red Cross Hospital at around March 2009 at the resident Red Cross, the deceased was judged to be normal as the pneumoconiosis-type 0/0 pneumoconiosis-type 0 pneumoconiosis-type, complicationt B B- non-act tuberculosis. On March 2010, as a result of the intensive diagnosis of the pneumoconiosis of the same hospital, “where the noise from the original or non-permanent noise on the both sides is high, and there is no large scale of noise” in the reading of chest simple radiation.
A disability grade 11 was determined by the Defendant as twit-band cardiopulmonary function F1/2 (Influoral disability), and around November 201, the Defendant was determined as a disability grade 7 from the Defendant due to pneumoconiosis type 1/2, complication 1/2, twit-band pulmonary function F1 (Influoral disability).
C. On May 21, 2014, the Deceased died at the Red Cross Hospital permanently stationed on 23:30.
The direct deathist in the death diagnosis report against the deceased is as follows: Matriium dynaium dynaium dynaium dynaium dynaium dynaium.
On June 25, 2015, the Plaintiff claimed bereaved family benefits and funeral expenses to the Defendant.
On August 18, 2015, the Defendant rejected the Plaintiff’s claim for survivors’ benefits and funeral expenses on the ground that “the deceased remains in a state of the left-hand side due to cerebral flapsy, and repeated increase in food care, blood pressure reduction, and heart flabing is accompanied by blue symptoms, and the blood pressure decrease, and the cause of death is not accurately known, but it is deemed that at least it is unrelated to pneumoconiosis.”
(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). 【No dispute exists, Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul’s evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings.
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is a pneumoconiosis and a combination of pneumoconiosis.