logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2015.10.16 2014구합60085
유족급여및장의비부지급처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On February 24, 2003, B entered the Sports Help Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant company”) and was on duty as a photographer. On December 29, 2012, B: (a) completed coverage on December 29, 2012, and went home to the Plaintiff, his spouse, on December 30, 2012, and then went home to the Republic of Korea on December 30, 2012; (b) went back to the hospital and was used for the purpose of suffering from serious pain (hereinafter “instant accident”); (c) was sent to the hospital; (d) was killed as “direct death: stop of the heart and middle-line event: SB event,” and (e) died of the heart on January 7, 2013.

(hereinafter “the instant death”). B.

On January 10, 2014, the Defendant deliberated on the Plaintiff on January 10, 201 on the following: (a) the death of the deceased is difficult to acknowledge a proximate causal relation with his/her duties, taking into account the following: (b) there was a disaster at his/her own home; (c) there was no unexpected event or emergency situation immediately before the occurrence of the disaster; (d) there was no sudden increase in work hours or changes in the work environment; (e) there was no objective evidence to recognize that the deceased was under chronic overwork or stress due to the work prior to the occurrence of the disaster; (b) there was insufficient mental or physical harm due to the work prior to the occurrence of the disaster; (c) there was smoking for a long time; and (d) the deceased’s death at the Committee for Determination of

(hereinafter referred to as "disposition of this case"). (c)

The Plaintiff filed a request for examination to the Defendant on February 7, 2014, but was dismissed on April 2, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is, due to the characteristics of the occupation, accumulated work of excessive hours, including overtime work and holiday work, in the instant case.

arrow