logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2019.03.22 2017구합58519
순직유족보상금부지급처분취소
Text

1. The Defendant’s disposition of compensation for survivors of public officials who died on duty on January 6, 2017 is revoked.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff’s spouse B (CB, hereinafter “the deceased”) served as a court official, from July 11, 2015 to D District Court E registry office, and D District Court E registry office from July 11, 2016 to D District Court civil application and participation in auction.

B. From July 19, 2016 to August 10, 2016, the Deceased used sick leave, and committed suicide at his own home on September 6, 2016 while the Deceased temporarily was on a disease from August 11, 2016 to February 10, 2017.

C. The Plaintiff filed a claim for compensation for survivors of public officials who died on duty via the head of the pension handling agency to which he belongs. However, on January 6, 2017, the Defendant rendered a disposition of compensation for survivors of public officials who died on duty on the ground that “The death of the deceased is a matter that can be sufficiently overcome from the perspective of ordinary average or workers, and it is difficult to recognize a proximate causal relationship between the death of the deceased and public duties,” on the ground that “The death of the deceased is a matter that can be sufficiently overcome from the perspective of ordinary average or workers, and is difficult to acknowledge a proximate causal relationship between the death of the deceased and public duties,” on the ground that “the deceased’s death of a deceased on duty is a matter that was expressed an abnormal opinion about his mental and physical illness since 2010 or appears to have a weak character.”

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). [Grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 through 5, the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is that: (a) the date on which the deceased deals with his/her duties in a flat and decent manner; and (b) the civil petition was filed due to the registration failure of his/her substitute worker on September 2009; (c) the Plaintiff received the first mental treatment on Nov. 1, 2009 on the ground of the water surface disorder and uneasiness caused by the reduction of work burden and the reduction of criminal liability; and (d) the deceased was regularly receiving treatment at least once a month; and (e) the deceased issued the E registry on July 11, 2015.

arrow