1. On July 29, 2015, the disposition that the Defendant rendered to the Plaintiff on July 29, 2015 is revoked.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The nationality B of the People’s Republic of China concluded a labor contract with Seocheon Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Seocheon Construction”) under the name of “C” on November 15, 2014, and performed work in the “E-Road Expansion Works (E) site” (hereinafter “instant construction site”) from November 16, 2014.

B On November 19, 2014, at an accommodation located in F, G, a worker of the same Gu, was faced with a traffic accident involving a car driven by I from the Dong Sari distance located in the Sing-gun, Gyeongnam-gun, Gyeongnam-gun, G, and worked at the construction site of the instant construction site in the Chang-gun, G, a worker of the same Gu (hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”).

B caused damage to two mouths, etc. to be transferred to a hospital, and received surgery and treatment, but died on January 9, 2015 due to acute brain damage.

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

As a wife of the deceased, the Plaintiff, who was registered in the People's Republic of China, brought the funeral of the deceased at his own expense, and claimed that the Defendant pay bereaved family benefits and funeral expenses according to the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act in relation to the death of the deceased.

However, on July 29, 2015, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff on the ground that “the instant accident does not constitute the criteria for recognition of occupational accidents, as it was not caused while the business owner was using a means of transportation or means of transportation that can be deemed to have been provided for commuting to and from work by the business owner.”

(hereinafter referred to as "disposition of this case"). 【No dispute exists, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 9, 13, and Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including virtual numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The accommodation offered by the Plaintiff’s assertion, Seocheon Construction, is room only on the pretext of the accommodation.