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 May 16, 2012, the Plaintiff’s ASEAN (hereinafter “the deceased”) is a person who entered the company C (hereinafter “instant company”) on May 16, 2012 and performed the duty of supporting and repairing computer systems related to security in the U.S. military unit.

B. At around 07:30 on November 14, 2013, the Deceased laid away from office at around 08:25 as he was scarbly scarbed and scarbly scarbly scarbed, and thereafter, 09:07 with D’s aid from the workplace, and applied to the National Assembly members within E, respectively.

As a result of the in-depth examination on the deceased, the above medical doctor of the National Assembly had to transfer the deceased to the In-university Seoul Bag Hospital (hereinafter “the instant hospital”) through the 119 emergency squad, as a result of the in-depth examination on the deceased.

The Deceased was hospitalized in the instant hospital at around 09:33, and was hospitalized in the hospital, but died at around 16:13 on the same day.

In the death report of the deceased, the direct death report of the deceased is written in the heart movement, the middle line organizer, and the middle line organizer in the heart color.

C. The Plaintiff asserted that the deceased’s death constitutes an occupational accident, and filed a claim for the payment of survivors’ benefits and funeral expenses. However, on December 7, 2016, the Defendant rendered a disposition on the site level of survivors’ benefits and funeral funeral expenses, based on the results of the review by the Seoul Committee on the Determination of Seoul Occupational Disease, that “The death is confirmed by cardio-fluence, after examining the deceased’s medical records, and there is no content of the short-term and chronic fault prior to the occurrence, and there is no high level of tension on August 2, 2016 due to the characteristics of the work, but it cannot be deemed that the contents of the work of the deceased cannot be deemed to have caused a serious serious fluence, and thus, it cannot be confirmed that

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). 【No dispute exists, entry in Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 through 3, 6, 7, 9 through 11, and Eul’s evidence No. 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. Support for the C4I computer system in charge of the Plaintiff’s assertion deceased.