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. Around 9:00 a.m. on May 9, 2010, B, the husband of the Plaintiff, was found to have died in the second floor of the dormitory of the second factory in D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant company”) located in Kimhae-si, Kim Jong-si, and the private person in the body draft of autopsy is a acute funeral (presumed).
B. On July 13, 2012, the Plaintiff filed a claim for the payment of bereaved family’s benefits and funeral expenses to the Defendant on the ground that the deceased’s membership in the instant company from February 13, 2010 to his/her employee in the night school and died as a acute funeral due to accumulation of overwork as a result of his/her early night school. However, on August 16, 2012, the Defendant decided to pay bereaved family’s benefits and funeral expenses on the ground that there was no evidence recognizing that the deceased is a company’s employee.
(hereinafter “instant disposition”). C.
The Plaintiff filed a request for review to the Defendant on November 15, 2012, but was dismissed on January 29, 2013, and again filed a request for review on April 26, 2013, but was dismissed on July 16, 2013.
【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1 through 3, the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. On February 2010, the Plaintiff’s assertion deceased joined the instant company and carried out “chiping” work, which processes steel plates for three months, 11 hours a day from the night and night 2. The “chiping work” is a work processing steel plates for vessel use, and the physical burden was accumulated as the deceased’s department.
The cumulative results in the death of the deceased due to the influence that is not suitable for the flow of the blood relative relationship of the deceased, so there is a causal relationship between work and death.
Although the deceased cannot be seen as a worker of the company of this case, according to the statements of foreign workers employed as the deceased, the defendant can recognize the fact that the deceased worked in the company of this case.
Nevertheless, because the deceased is an illegal Stayer, this case.