logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2017.03.31 2016구합70680
유족급여및장의비부지급처분취소
Text

1. On October 6, 2015, the disposition that the Defendant rendered to the Plaintiff on October 6, 2015 as bereaved family benefits and funeral site wages shall be revoked.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On August 8, 2012, the Plaintiff’s spouse B (CB, hereinafter “the deceased”) entered the D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Company”) and worked as the head of the E-group department in charge of travel and leisure division.

B. On January 20, 2015, the Deceased was at around 18:05, at around 18:05, at around 18:20, at around 18:20, at around 18:20, at around 18:20, he/she exchanged mobile phone messages with his/her employees and took care of the company.

On February 11, 2015, the Deceased was sent to a nearby F Hospital with a vehicle of 119 emergency rescue squad called around 18:40, and was killed at the hospital on February 11, 2015

(hereinafter “the instant death”). C.

The Plaintiff claimed the bereaved family benefits and funeral expenses to the Defendant.

However, on October 6, 2015, the Defendant issued a disposition of survivors’ benefits and funeral site pay (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff on the ground that “There is no objective evidence to acknowledge that the deceased had undergone a sudden change in the business environment or short-term and chronic course, and considering high blood pressure, smoking power, etc., it is difficult to recognize a proximate causal relationship between the business and the disaster as an individual’s outbreak, and thus, it is difficult to recognize a proximate causal relationship between the business and the disaster.”

The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed a request for reexamination, but was dismissed on June 1, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, 15, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 3, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Deceased was suffering from imminent competition among the Plaintiff’s assertion electronic commerce enterprises, sales of the company over three occasions, etc., and the Deceased was subject to unstable social position and stress. In addition, the Deceased changed the approval line due to the reorganization of the company that took place around January 2015, and recruited new human resources. The burden of business was aggravated due to rapid increase in sales target.

Without considering these overwork and stress of the deceased.

arrow