1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The deceased B (hereinafter “the deceased”) was appointed as a police officer on October 5, 191, and from February 3, 2012, the D police station guard and the traffic control division were on duty as a police officer.

B. At around 14:45 on September 12, 2012, the Deceased, while driving a F rocketing patrol vehicle at the E Twit distance, entered the Sam-distance Intersection without stopping the stop on the stop line. While the state of red signal changed from G to H, the Deceased died due to a traffic accident that conflicts with the International 5 tons truck, straight down on the right side in the direction to the right side in green (hereinafter “instant traffic accident”).

C. On October 24, 2012, the Plaintiff, a spouse of the deceased, claimed compensation for survivors to the Public Officials Pension Service, and on October 24, 2012, the Public Officials Pension Service rendered a decision on gross negligence on the part of the Plaintiff (hereinafter “decision on gross negligence”) pursuant to Article 62(3) of the former Public Officials Pension Act (amended by Act No. 12600, May 20, 2014; hereinafter “former Public Officials Pension Act”).

The Plaintiff filed a request for review of gross negligence with the Public Official Pension Benefit Review Committee, and on January 15, 2013, the Public Official Pension Benefit Review Committee revoked a decision on gross negligence on the ground that “The Deceased’s negligence is recognized as to an accident caused by the deceased’s breach of signal, but it is difficult to view it as a gross negligence.”

원고는 2013. 2. 8. 순직유족급여를 청구하였고, 안전행정부장관은 순직보상심사위원회의 심의를 거쳐 2013. 4. 30. 원고에 대하여 "① 망인이 도로상황을 점검하기 위해 순찰한 직무수행은 경비, 주요 인사 경호, 대간첩작전, 교통의 단속과 위해의 방지 업무에 해당하지 않는 점, ② 망인의 직무가 생명과 신체의 위험을 무릅쓴 고도의 위험 직무라고...