logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2016.11.29 2016구합1905
산업재해보상보험유족급여및장의비부지급처분취소
Text

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. C from November 2010, after entering the Republic of Korea in around 2010, after entering the People’s Republic of China (hereinafter “China”), it has been working in D (a similar personal enterprise at the time of entry of C, but was converted into a business entity as a corporation around March 7, 2014; hereinafter “D”).

B. At around 07:30 on December 19, 2014, C was used in D’s resting room in D’s factory, and immediately thereafter was transferred to a hospital’s emergency room, and was subject to emergency measures, etc., but died on December 20, 2014, on December 20, 2014.

(B) Therefore, according to the deceased’s death diagnosis report with respect to the deceased, the cause of the cerebral cerebral mathy (formerly prior private person) was the “cerebral mathy,” and the cause of the cerebral mathyal mathy (former private person) was the “cerebral mathy,” and the cause of the cerebral mathal mathy was the “cerebral pressure and cerebral mathy” and the cause of the cerebral mathy and the ma

C. Around February 25, 2015, the Plaintiffs, who are the offspring of the Deceased, claimed to the Defendant for the payment of survivors’ benefits and funeral expenses according to the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act in relation to the death of the Deceased.

On May 13, 2015, the Defendant notified the Plaintiffs to the effect that “The Plaintiffs would not accept the Plaintiffs’ claim for the payment of survivors’ benefits and funeral expenses according to the Daejeon Occupational Disease Determination Committee that there is no proximate causal relation between the deceased’s death and his/her duties.”

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). 【No dispute exists, Gap evidence 1-1, Gap evidence 16, 20, Eul evidence 1-3, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiffs’ assertion 1) The Deceased was 39 days immediately before the death (from November 10, 2014 to December 18, 2014, without a single day including Saturdays and Sundays.

The Deceased worked for 66.55 hours per week immediately preceding the death, and average of 62.1 week during the 12 weeks immediately preceding the death.

arrow