유족급여및장의비부지급처분취소
1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of each disposition;
A. B (CB, hereinafter “the network”) worked as a mining source from July 197 to April 1989 in D Mining, E Mining, F Mining, etc.
B. From May 29, 200 to June 3, 2000, the Deceased was diagnosed as pneumoconiosis after having undergone a precise diagnosis by G Hospital, and was judged as disability 11 on June 8, 200.
C. On March 15, 2017, the Deceased died at H Hospital on or around 02:40, and the death diagnosis report on the Deceased issued by the foregoing hospital is written in the form of a direct death, a cardiopulmonary suspension, a middle-board event, and a pre-board worker, respectively.
The Plaintiff, the deceased’s spouse, filed a claim for the payment of pneumoconiosis survivors’ pension and funeral expenses with the Defendant. On February 7, 2018, the Defendant rendered a decision on the site level on the ground that “the deceased’s treatment was provided to the Defendant, such as cardiopulmonary fluoral typhism outside the pneumoconiosis and cardiopulmonary culposis, refluoral cluoral culposis, primary culposis, cardiopulmonary culmatosis, chronic pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary ect.”
(hereinafter “instant No. 1 Disposition”). (e)
The Plaintiff filed a claim for the payment of pneumoconiosis consolation benefits with the Defendant, but on April 6, 2018, the Defendant rendered a land payment decision on the ground that “the deceased’s death does not constitute the death of pneumoconiosis, and thus, did not cause the cause for the payment of survivor consolation benefits.”
(hereinafter “Disposition No. 2 of this case”). [Ground for recognition] (Ground for recognition] does not dispute, entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7 and 14, and the purport of the whole pleadings.