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 June 3, 2017, B died due to a fire that occurred in C, which is the workplace to which he belongs (hereinafter “instant disaster”).

(hereinafter referred to as “the deceased”). B

On June 5, 2018, the Plaintiff asserted that he/she is a de facto spouse of the deceased, and claimed bereaved family benefits and funeral expenses to the Defendant. However, on August 13, 2018, the Defendant rendered a disposition on bereaved family benefits and funeral funeral expenses (hereinafter “instant disposition”) against the Plaintiff on the ground that it is difficult to recognize a de facto marital relationship between the Plaintiff and the deceased.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 2 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is a de facto spouse who lives together with the Deceased from July 5, 2003 to June 3, 2017, while living together in Daegu Dong-gu D from the time of his death due to the instant disaster, and thus, the Defendant’s disposition was unlawful on the premise that the relationship between the Deceased and the Plaintiff’s de facto marriage is not recognized.

(b) Entry in the attached Form of relevant Acts and subordinate statutes;

C. Determination 1) The spouse entitled to bereaved family’s benefits under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act includes “a person in a de facto marital relationship” (Article 5 subparag. 3, Articles 62, 63, and 65), and “ de facto marital relationship” refers to a marital relationship between the parties, while there is an intention to marry between themselves and there is an substance of marital life that can be recognized as a marital life in terms of the order of family in terms of social norms objectively and objectively, and even if there was no report of marriage, which is a formal requirement, it refers to a marital relationship between

Therefore, it is insufficient to say that there is a simple living or a sporadic relationship between the parties to be protected as a de facto marriage, and that there is a subjective intention to marry between the parties, and objectively, a couple’s communal living in terms of family order in terms of social norms.