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 January 3, 2014, the Plaintiff’s husband B (hereinafter “the deceased”) entered D Co., Ltd., a cooperative firm for the construction industry of the mountain mountain and mountain mountain and construction industry, and worked at the head office as office office from January 1, 2015 to March 22, 2015. From March 23, 2015 to E Co., Ltd., the head office was the head office at the site of the E Co., Ltd.

B. Around 17:00 on June 19, 2015, the Deceased got out of work to leave, and was treated by a National Assembly member of the Furgical Department by suffering from an open upper part of the inner part. Around 22:00 at his own home after his/her retirement, the Deceased was first sent to the hospital, and then died on June 20, 2015.

C. On November 9, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a claim against the Defendant for survivors’ benefits and funeral expenses by asserting that the deceased died from the process of performing his/her duties. On December 28, 2015, the Defendant rendered a disposition of survivors’ benefits and funeral funeral expenses (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the death of the deceased was caused by the neglect of management of chronic high blood pressure, which is a personal disease, and thus, the causal relationship between his/her duties and the death was not recognized.

The Plaintiff, who was dissatisfied with the instant disposition, filed a petition for review to the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Reexamination Committee, but was dismissed on June 7, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including paper numbers), the fact-finding and reply to the Director of the F fixed-type hospital of this Court, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that his previous high blood pressure rapidly aggravated due to occupational or stress. As such, there is a proximate causal relation between the deceased’s work and the death.

Therefore, the instant disposition made on a different premise is unlawful.

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

(c).