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 July 11, 2016, the Plaintiff’s husband’s husband (hereinafter “the deceased”) was an employee of C, and was used during the time-off period, and was transferred to a hospital during the time-off period, and was transferred to the hospital at around 22:00 on July 14, 2016, but was killed due to extended heart disease in the Ansan Hospital of Korea University (hereinafter “instant injury and disease”).

B. On August 20, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an application for the payment of survivors’ benefits and funeral expenses with respect to the Defendant, claiming that it should be recognized as occupational accidents since the Deceased died while performing his/her duties. However, on January 5, 2017, the Defendant determined that proximate causal relation between the deceased’s work and the deceased’s death was not recognized.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). C.

On April 4, 2017, the Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed a request for reexamination with the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Reexamination Committee on April 4, 2017. However, on June 1, 2017, the said written ruling was served on the Plaintiff on June 26, 2017.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap Nos. 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, Eul evidence No. 13 and 14, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the deceased worked for up to 11 hours a day, and worked for at least 8 hours a day on Saturdays, etc., and the Plaintiff’s assertion caused an extended heart disease around 2014 by performing an excessive work.

Despite the occurrence of such a health problem to the Deceased, the Deceased did not take care of his duties at all, and performed excessive work at an average of 52 hours per week, and the Deceased was requested to participate in volunteer activities even during Saturdays, a day off the so-called so-called so-called so-called “the so-called so-called “the so-called so-called” day.

The Defendant, even though such overwork and stress of the deceased aggravated the injury and disease of this case and caused the death of the deceased, is on duty the injury and disease of this case.