1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. On February 4, 2015, the Defendant rendered a provisional disposition against the Plaintiff for the payment of the survivors’ pension on duty.

1. The grounds for this part of the disposition by the court are as stated in the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance (from No. 2, No. 2, and No. 3, of the judgment of the court of first instance). Thus, this part is cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act, and Article 420 of the

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion was that the deceased had to receive an excessive learning work during the instant education period and have a life under strict control. The Plaintiff’s excessive official duties and stress during the instant education period led to the death of the deceased, which caused the death of the deceased.

In addition, immediate emergency measures are important for the birth of a patient at a heart such as the deceased, and a proximate causal relation is recognized between the death of the deceased and his official duties, because the deceased's death caused death without immediate emergency measures in the special environment of military service.

B. Determination 1 related legal principles refer to the death caused by a disease caused by a public official’s official duty, which is the requirement for claiming compensation for survivors under Article 61(1) of the Public Officials Pension Act. Thus, in order to fall under the above, there is a causal relationship between the public official’s and the disease caused by the death. However, if the main cause of the disease is not directly related to the public official’s official duty, but at least theromatic stress overlaps with the main cause of the disease and caused or aggravated the disease, the causal relationship should be deemed to exist. The causal relationship does not necessarily have to be proved clearly by medical and natural science, but even if it is presumed that there is a proximate causal relationship between the public official’s and the disease when considering all the circumstances. In addition, the basic disease or the existing disease, which can normally work at ordinary times, is serious in the official duty.