1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On August 1, 1961, the Plaintiff’s husband B (hereinafter “the Plaintiff’s husband”) entered D Co., Ltd. and works as a mining source.

On September 5, 1987, the company retired from office, and on November 11, 1991, the company re-employed and worked as a light source until December 29, 192.

B. As a result of the diagnosis of pneumoconiosis conducted around November 2004 at E Hospital and the re-examination conducted on August 9, 2005, the Deceased was judged as having received the two-type pneumoconiosis (2/3) and the cardiopulmonary function disorder (F3).

C. The Deceased died on July 21, 2013 while hospitalized in a F Hospital and being treated. According to the death diagnosis report, the direct death of the Deceased is a pulmonody (presume), the intermediate event is a high-level disability, and the preceding death is a pneumoconiosis.

The Plaintiff claimed for the payment of survivors’ benefits and funeral expenses to the Defendant on the ground that the deceased’s death constitutes occupational accidents. However, on December 3, 2013, the Defendant rendered a disposition of survivors’ benefits and funeral funeral expenses on the ground that it is difficult to deem the deceased’s death due to pneumoconiosis and its merger.

E. Since then, the Plaintiff filed a claim for the payment of survivors’ benefits and funeral expenses with the Defendant, on July 10, 2014, on the ground that the Plaintiff’s claim for survivors’ benefits and funeral expenses is the same as the claim for a site payment on December 3, 2013, the Defendant issued a disposition of survivors’ benefits and funeral expenses.

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). [Grounds for recognition] The Disposition in this case is without dispute; Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4; Eul evidence No. 3; and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion has continuously aggravated the pulmonary function since the outbreak of pneumoconiosis in 1987, and caused chronic pulmonary pulmonary disease, and eventually died due to the death of the deceased, a proximate causal relationship between the death and the pneumoconiosis is acknowledged.

Therefore, the death of the deceased constitutes occupational accidents and the disposition of this case by the defendant who rejected the Plaintiff’s claim for the payment of survivors’ benefits and funeral expenses on a different premise is unlawful.

(b).