1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The Defendant’s disposition on December 9, 2015 against the Plaintiff’s compensation for survivors’ compensation.

1. The reasons why this part of the disposition is to be stated by the court are as follows, and this part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this part of the reasoning is cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of

No. 2 of the judgment of the first instance court, the second 8th e.g., “Written Retirement on February 15, 2015” was submitted to the effect that “Written Retirement was submitted on January 13, 2015.”

In the 3th judgment of the first instance court, “The Plaintiff filed a request for review of the instant disposition with the Public Official Pension Benefit Review Committee, but the Public Official Pension Benefit Review Committee dismissed the Plaintiff’s request for review on March 16, 2016.”

The evidence No. 6 shall be added to the fourth page of the judgment of the first instance.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) A summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that, around August 2014, while working at the C Team, the Deceased was under serious occupational stress in the civil petition dispute between the non-life insurer and the motor vehicle maintenance business entity. As a result, the Deceased caused depression to the Deceased. On January 1, 2015, the Deceased was transferred to a construction headquarters with relatively low occupational stress, but the depression that had already been caused has continuously deteriorated, and a proximate causal relation is recognized between the Deceased’s suicide and his/her official duties. Therefore, in light of the background and circumstances leading up to the death of the Deceased’s assertion on different premise, the instant disposition on different premise is unlawful, and in view of the Defendant’s assertion, the Deceased’s intent or private act unrelated to official duties died, and thus, it is difficult to recognize a substantial causal relationship between the Deceased and the deceased’s death in official duties.

Therefore, the instant disposition is lawful.

B. Article 61 of the Public Officials Pension Act (wholly amended by Act No. 13387, Jun. 22, 2015) provides compensation for survivors, and compensation for survivors.