1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On November 26, 2011, while the Plaintiff’s husband’s husband’s work as a financial team (“the deceased”), the Plaintiff went out to a mountain of protein around 13:00 on November 26, 201, and was found to have committed suicide with the Plaintiff’s husband using a mountain log, which was installed on trees in the Domsan-ro, Domsan, Domsan, Domsan (hereinafter “Domsan”), 08:30 on the following day.

(hereinafter “instant disaster”). (b)

The Plaintiff asserted that the deceased’s death constitutes an occupational accident and filed a claim for the payment of survivors’ benefits and funeral expenses with the Defendant. However, on April 22, 2015, the Defendant: (a) on the ground that there was an occupational stress on the deceased; (b) on the ground that there was insufficient grounds to deem that the deceased was in a state of mental illness that could have lost his/her own judgment; and (c) on the ground that it is difficult to deem that the deceased committed suicide in the state of mental disorder due to his/her duties,

C. The Plaintiff appealed and filed a request for review with the Public Official Pension Benefit Review Committee, but was dismissed on August 27, 2015 by the Public Official Pension Benefit Review Committee.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 6, and purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the Board of Audit and Inspection suffered from extreme stress in relation to the case of “unfair payment of D installed value-added tax” that the Board of Audit and Inspection conducted against C. This led to suicide due to the death of the deceased in a state of mental or physical disorder whose normal perception, ability to choose action, and mental suppression capacity has been significantly deteriorated. As such, there is a proximate causal relation between the deceased’

Therefore, the death of the deceased constitutes occupational accident, and thus, the disposition of this case to the different purport is unlawful.

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;

C. The deceased’s work experience in recognition and work experience.