204Guhap626 Revocation of Disposition of Refusal of Persons of Distinguished Service

A

The head of Gwangju Regional Veterans Administration

July 15, 2004

August 19, 2004

1. The defendant's decision on Sep. 19, 2003 against the plaintiff on Sep. 19, 2003 is revoked.

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

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On July 18, 2001, the Plaintiff’s husband, was diagnosed as a major depression disorder at the D Hospital on July 18, 2001, and was treated as a mental therapy around September 24, 2001, and committed suicide on the ground in the Nam-gu Seoul metropolitan E apartment 102 Dong1901.

B. On July 15, 2003, the Plaintiff filed an application for registration of bereaved family members of a person of distinguished service to the State on the ground that the deceased constituted a public official who died on duty under Article 4(1)11 of the Act on the Honorable Treatment of and Support for Persons of Distinguished Service to the State (hereinafter “the Act”), but on September 19, 2003, the Defendant rendered a decision on the eligibility of bereaved family members of a person of distinguished service to the State (hereinafter “the instant disposition”), subject to a resolution of the Board of Patriots and Veterans Entitlement to the Act, on the ground that the deceased’s death was caused by self-injury under Article 4(5)4 of the Act, as a person’s death by self-injury,

[Ground of Recognition] Unstrifed Facts, Gap evidence 1 to 3, and Eul evidence 1

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The Deceased’s suicide was ultimately caused by the outbreak, aggravation, and aggravation of depression caused by mental stress in the course of performing public duties as a teacher of the Deceased. The Deceased’s suicide was caused by the symptoms of mental illness, and the normal perception, the ability to choose an act, or the ability to suppress mental disorder was significantly deteriorated. As such, not only constitutes death in the course of performing public duties, but also constitutes “self-injury” as prescribed by the Act, and thus, the disposition of this case is unlawful.

(b) Related statutes;

It is as shown in the attached Form.

(c) Fact of recognition;

(1) On September 1, 1974, the Deceased was employed as a teacher of the high civic school as a graduate school, and thereafter served as Cmiddle school morals and teacher from March 1, 200. The above Cmiddle school organized three classes every school year, and 90 teachers and staff such as a principal and a teacher were educating more than 90 students. From March 2001, the Deceased was in charge of the duties of the principal of the above middle school and the assistant principal in the public room as well as the classes of the moral subject in charge as well as the classes of safety school, character education, unification education, assistant instruction, management of school steering committee, etc.

(2) On March 1, 2001, H was appointed as the principal of the above C Middle School, and the above H changed from the previous date to “B’s introduction and announcement of “B’s assertion”, which was an event held in the above school, the school site and school examination were required to be abolished, and despite teachers’ opposition, the task pool called “B’s thought-raising” was required to be exercised. In other words, the school affairs schedule was changed interestally without consultation with the teachers and the school operation committee, and accordingly, the amount of work was continuously increased by neglecting the annual education plan, such as cancelling the school festivals and sports for which he had already been under planning and preparation, and ordering the teachers and the school operation committee to conduct field trips for the foregoing changed event.

(3) In addition, the above H urged the deceased to prepare for a school event, such as a meal event, sports event, etc., and told the deceased to the effect that, whenever the work of the deceased falls short of his expectation, the deceased cannot work properly on the site where another teacher exists. On April 2001, the above H instructed the deceased to remove all the winners posted in the front bridge from the front bridge on the ground that the school environment adjustment is not in mind.

(4) In addition, the above H made an insulting statement on the performance evaluation, such as "I will not give the performance evaluation to the deceased who was sensitive to the performance evaluation of his assistant principal before the promotion of his work, and "I will not give it well to the performance evaluation." On the other hand, at any time at the place where other teachers and staff are located, "I will see the performance evaluation," and "I will give the points to the person who is prepared, regardless of the head of the department," and "I will come to the position of the principal because I will come to the position of the school," and "I will go to the position of the principal," and "I will go to the mind of the principal."

(5) Meanwhile, on the ground that the above H manages the after-school school and instructs students after the late school hours, he instructed the deceased to board and lodge with his school principal’s official residence. Accordingly, the deceased, from Apr. 201 to Apr. 2001, was living in the school principal’s official residence like the above H, and was not affected by mental stress due to his failure to have his personal privacy and the inconvenience with the above H continued, and became the above official residence around Jun. 20 of the same year.

(6) As above, the Deceased continued to demand unreasonable services to the Deceased and forced him to take excessive responsibilities or to take a bodily injury after he left the hospital. In the process of the treatment, the Deceased’s instructions were given to the head of the school to make a living together with the above H, resulting in a gradually decreasing and uneasiness. However, on June 4, 2001, the Deceased appeared to have been diagnosed by a member of the National Assembly, who complained of symptoms such as influor, sat, satis, bath and bathing, anxiety, and brut, and satise, the Deceased was diagnosed by the D Hospital on July 18 of the same year, and continued to receive a pain treatment from that time to that time. In the process of the treatment, it seems difficult for the doctor in charge of the foregoing treatment to bear a large amount of satisfy with the head of the school.

(7) On September 22, 2001, immediately before the deceased’s death, the above middle school was released from Myeonmanman-do in the middle school. The deceased was subject to unreasonable stress in the process of the above event preparation, left school at the latest on the day of the event, and carried out school expenses and cleaning work, etc., and thereafter, the deceased committed suicide. (8) On September 24, 2009, the cause of the outbreak of depression can be largely divided into biological factors such as cerebral negomon’s abnormal, genetic factors such as family history, external stress, etc. The normal symptoms of Maul are depression, loss of interest, reduction of body weight, degree of disability, responsibility for the crime, etc., and the highest rate of risk of suicide at the early stage of suicide is known to the maximum rate of risk of 15% per cent suicide.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 4 through 15, 16 evidence 1, 2, Gap 17 through 20, 24, 27 through 29, and the purport of the whole pleadings

D. Determination

The purport of Article 4(5)4 of the Act excluded the scope of a person who died as a result of self-injury is that the result of self-injury by a person who committed suicide, while having normal mental capacity and free will, is not directly connected to his/her duties, and rather, it is contrary to the purport of recognizing and compensating for persons who rendered distinguished services to the State. Therefore, in cases where a person who committed suicide lacks normal private ability or free will at the time of self-injury, it cannot be deemed that such self-injury constitutes a death by self-injury under Article 4(5)4 of the Act.

Therefore, in full view of the following facts: (a) the above fact-finding was insufficient to support the deceased, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge that there was any other cause or suicide that may cause depression to the deceased; and (b) the deceased’s normal school life for about 27 years until the time of the death was committed by H on March 1, 201; (c) frequent changes in school academic schedule and subsequent tasks; (d) significant mental stressed due to frequent insulting remarks related to school events; (e) changes in school academic schedule; (e) changes in work hours; (e) uneasiness related to school events; and (e) uneasiness in work assessment; and (e) the deceased’s suicide without boomic symptoms caused by opic symptoms of depression. It is reasonable to presume that the deceased’s suicide led to suicide.

Therefore, the deceased's death is based on the actual occurrence of a disease caused by official duties and there is a proximate causal relation with his official duties. The deceased's suicide goes beyond the normal and free will of the deceased and does not constitute "the death caused by self-injury as prescribed in Article 4 (5) 4 of the Act, and eventually, the deceased's death constitutes a public official who died on duty as prescribed in Article 4 (1) 11 of the Act. Thus, the defendant's disposition of this case decided that the deceased's death was caused by "self-injury" and thus, the deceased's death did not constitute a person who has rendered distinguished

3. Conclusion

If so, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable and acceptable.

The presiding judge, the senior judge;

Judges Park Jeong-young

Judges Love

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.