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 Plaintiff is the spouse of the deceased B (CB, hereinafter “the deceased”).

B. From December 1, 2013 to April 14, 2014, the Deceased worked as an assistant for electric power distribution business at the E plant construction site located in Y (hereinafter “instant construction site”), and around April 13:0, 2014, the Deceased was discovered from the main toilet in the instant construction site and died during transmission to the hospital.

C. On October 29, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a claim against the Defendant for the payment of survivors’ benefits and funeral expenses on the ground that the deceased’s death constitutes an occupational accident. However, on December 10, 2014, the Defendant rendered a decision on the payment of survivors’ benefits and funeral funeral expenses on the ground that, according to the result of the deliberation by the Committee for Determination of the Occupational Disease Disease Review on December 10, 2014, it is difficult to acknowledge a proximate causal relation because it is difficult to find a proximate causal relation between the deceased’s work and the deceased’s acute distress, as it is not confirmed that there was a sudden increase in the work or sudden work, or that there was an occupational career or stress, prior to the occurrence of the

On March 9, 2015, the Plaintiff appealed and filed a request for an examination under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act with the Defendant on March 9, 2015, but was dismissed on April 10, 2015 on the ground that there is no proximate causal relation with the deceased’s death.

E. On March 10, 2016, the Plaintiff again filed a claim for the payment of survivors’ benefits and funeral expenses to the Defendant. However, on March 25, 2016, the Defendant rendered a decision on the payment of survivors’ benefits and funeral expenses on the ground of the previous decision and the result of the request for examination.

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). 【Unsatisfys 1, 4, 5, 10 evidence, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 7, the purport of the whole pleadings, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion was returned to the same day on Sundays, when the construction site of this case is living on a remote place.