1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. From March 2013, the Plaintiff was appointed as a professor exclusively in charge of lecture at B University from around March 2013, and served until September 30, 2014, and was subscribed to the National Pension Scheme during the said period.

On October 1, 2014, the Plaintiff was appointed as a full-time professor in special service at the above university, and was admitted to the pension for private school teachers and staff.

The defendant is a corporation established pursuant to the Pension for Private School Teachers and Staff Act (hereinafter referred to as the "Private School Pension Act") and carries out the affairs, etc. concerning the management of pension under the Private School Pension Act.

B. From September 2014, the Plaintiff demoted three subjects at B University (nine hours a week) and demoted two subjects at Daejeon University (six hours a week).

C. On October 6, 2014, at around 12:00, the Plaintiff appeared to have been sent to an emergency room while making a lecture in Buniversity lecture room, and was written in two copies and Gutoo, and sent to the emergency room.

On April 13, 2017, the Plaintiff was diagnosed as in detail cerebral Bribery (hereinafter “the instant injury”). On April 13, 2017, the Plaintiff claimed that the instant injury was an occupational accident and filed an application for approval of medical care in the course of performing his/her duties under the Private School Pension Act with the Defendant.

E. On May 29, 2017, the Defendant rendered a decision to reject the said application on the ground that it is difficult to recognize a proximate causal relationship between the upper branch and the performance of duties on the grounds that it is difficult to recognize the occurrence of an individual’s basic disease by the natural military register progress under physical conditions rather than that the instant injury was caused by an excessive performance of duties.

F. Accordingly, the Plaintiff filed a request for reexamination to the Defendant on July 2017, but the Defendant dismissed the request for reexamination on November 3, 2017.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence Nos. 4, 5, 7 through 10 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. At the time of the occurrence of the instant injury or disease, the Plaintiff appeared to work almost every day, and the Plaintiff goes to work at the weekend and works on holidays such as preparation for lessons and performance of research services.