logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2017.09.29 2015구합82365
유족보상금부지급결정취소 청구
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

Details of the disposition

The Plaintiff’s husband He (hereinafter the Deceased) worked in the Ministry of Justice from March 16, 1994, and worked in the policy planning office and finance office from July 29, 2013 to July 20, 2014, and thereafter in the creative administration office.

On July 29, 2014, the Deceased was killed at around 07:58 on the following day while he/she was hospitalized in an emergency room at Aju University Hospital and was hospitalized in an Aju University Hospital and was receiving examination and treatment.

In the death diagnosis report on the deceased, the direct death person is written as blood of the above Minister and the cause of the direct death is written as alcohol light.

The Plaintiff asserted that the causal relationship between the deceased’s death and his duties is recognized, and filed a claim for compensation for bereaved family with the Defendant. However, on April 6, 2015, the Defendant rendered a disposition on compensation for bereaved family on the ground that “the deceased’s death appears to have occurred due to ordinary drinking habits rather than the deceased’s death due to over-duty and stress, and thus, caused the death. Therefore, proximate causal relationship between the deceased’s death and his official duties is not recognized.”

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed a request for an examination with the Public Official Pension Benefit Review Committee, but the said request was dismissed on September 9, 2015.

[Based on recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 8 (including the number of branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), and the purport of the whole pleadings, the purport of the disposition of this case is legitimate, and the plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff's action of this case is legitimate, led to the death by failing to respond to sudden health deterioration due to the leave of the relevant personnel on the ground of the worker's leave of absence in the situation where Byung applied for the treatment for two days before the death.

arrow