1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The Defendant’s person eligible for veteran’s compensation against the Plaintiff on December 4, 2013.

1. Reference part; 1. Grounds for Disposition;

2. The phrase “a. Plaintiff’s assertion” and “related Acts and subordinate statutes” are the same as the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, they are cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

C. 1) The issue of this case was determined as follows: (a) the deceased died from an accident or disaster that occurred during his/her work on the net route and method; and (b) the deceased’s death should not be due to the deceased’s gross negligence or a significant violation of relevant Acts and subordinate statutes without any inevitable reason (Article 2(3)1 of the Act on the Support of Persons Eligible for Veterans, Article 2(1)1 and 1 subparag. 5 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act), and (b) the deceased’s act of departure from his/her place of work should be examined as to whether the deceased’s accident or death occurred during his/her work on the net route and method; (c) the deceased’s act of departure from his/her place of work could not be deemed as a minimum act to return to his/her place of work on his/her rational route and method; (d) the defendant submitted evidence of his/her departure from his/her place of work on the ground that the act of departure from his/her place of work did not constitute evidence 1 to No. 1654 of departure from his/her place of work. 17.