logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2016.11.24 2013구합28817
유족보상일시금및장의비부지급처분취소
Text

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

On February 8, 2006, the background of the instant disposition C (D) was determined on September 18, 2007 as follows: (a) the Plaintiff’s father, who had been working at the Eriju station, received medical care approval for the type of cerebral cerebral cerebral cerebral cerebral cerebrals and cerebral cerebral cerebral cerebrals (hereinafter “instant approved injury and disease”); and (b) on September 18, 2007, he was determined as having a significant obstacle to the function or mental function of the Nriju system and could not engage in daily labor for the remaining life.

C On January 31, 2012, 2012, the outbreak of “the cerebral cerebral cerebral cerebral Speze (cerebral Speze)” (hereinafter referred to as “cerebral Speze”) and was killed on July 31, 2013 by receiving medical treatment from F Hospital and G Hospital.

(hereinafter referred to as “C.” The direct death of the deceased on the death report is “waste collection”, and the preceding deather is “brain color.”

The Plaintiffs asserted that the deceased’s death constitutes occupational accidents and claimed for the payment of survivors’ benefits and funeral expenses to the Defendant. On August 27, 2013, the Defendant rendered a disposition of survivors’ benefits and funeral funeral expenses on the ground that “The deceased died due to the aggravation of symptoms during treatment due to cerebral conditions for which no additional medical care was granted, and thus, it is difficult to recognize a proximate causal relationship between the deceased’s death and the deceased’s death.”

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). [The grounds for recognition] did not dispute, and the purport of Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 through 3, and 5 as a whole, and the purport of the entirety of the arguments and arguments is legitimate, the deceased asserted that the Disposition in this case is legitimate, and thus, the deceased's failure to take care of his family's assistance at the time of use, meals, and walking due to the right-hand convenience, which is the aftermath of the approved injury of the disease in this case, led to the death of the deceased, resulting in sudden aggravation of high blood pressure, which is an existing disease, due to the rapid aggravation of the state of nature.

Therefore, there is a proximate causal relationship between the deceased's death and the injury of this case.

arrow