유족급여및장의비부지급처분취소
1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
1. As to the instant case, the reasoning of the first instance court is to add “the court” to “the court of first instance” in the first instance judgment No. 8, No. 20, and No. 10, and “the court of first instance” in the first instance judgment No. 10, and “the court of first instance shall not calculate the average working hours of the deceased including commuting hours. However, it is difficult to view that the site of the instant construction should be included in the working hours of the deceased merely because the site of the construction was located far away from the deceased’s residence and public transportation is extremely poor.” (3) In the first instance judgment No. 11, “it shall be considered that the work hours of the deceased should be included in the work hours of the deceased,” and “the construction cost of the instant construction, aggravation of the financial status of the joint contractors, and the quality of the ordering office due to the delay in construction,” and “the amount of the deceased’s wages shall not be included in the amount of No. 21 to 212, 2016.2.2.
(2) The court of first instance, which rejected the plaintiffs' assertion by examining the evidence submitted by the court of first instance and the court of first instance, is not significantly different from the allegations in the court of first instance, and even if it re-examines the evidence submitted by the court of first instance and the court of first instance, the court of first instance is justified. Thus, the plaintiffs' appeal is justified.