1. The disposition that the Defendant rendered to the Plaintiff on January 20, 2016 as bereaved family benefits and funeral site wages shall be revoked.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

The Plaintiff’s husband, the Plaintiff’s husband, was in the process of collecting the heats of the mother trees in the instant apartment on October 30, 2014 by using a bridge, bridge, etc., around 1:30 on October 30, 2014 while serving as a staff member of the management office of the C Apartment (hereinafter “the instant apartment”). In the course of collecting the heats of the mother trees in the instant apartment, there was an accident falling below 2m and lower than 30m in height.

(hereinafter “instant fall accident”). B, as the instant fall accident, was found to have committed suicide on May 7, 2015 at the D Hospital toilet on the instant fall, after obtaining the approval of the medical care for the “emerculation of emissions No. 3, Mami-Mamina, Mami-Mali-Malith, Mali-Mali-Mali-Malith,” and received hospital treatment (hereinafter “instant injury”).

(B) On December 16, 2015, the Plaintiff claimed for the payment of survivors’ benefits and funeral expenses to the Defendant on the ground that the deceased’s death constitutes occupational accidents. However, on January 20, 2016, the Defendant rendered a decision on the payment of survivors’ benefits and funeral expenses on the ground that “it is difficult to deem that the deceased did self-injury in a state where normal recognition ability, etc. is clearly impeded.”

(2) The Plaintiff’s death and the injury and disease of this case shall be deemed to have committed suicide in a state of mental disorder due to depression, i.e., a sense of confluence on the fact that the death of the deceased and the injury and disease of this case cannot be returned to the daily life prior to the accident, such as the Plaintiff’s assertion of legitimacy of the disposition of this case as to whether the disposition of this case was lawful, as indicated in the evidence Nos. 1 through 3, and Nos. 1 through 1, and the purport of the entire argument, including the following facts: (a) there is no dispute; and (b) there is a reasonable causal relation between the death of the deceased and the injury and disease of this case.

Ultimately, the death of the deceased constitutes occupational accidents, and the payment of survivors' benefits and funeral expenses on different premises.