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 April 24, 2017, while working as a teacher in charge of Japanese language at B High School, the Plaintiff lost consciousness during class hours, and was diagnosed as “patch-to-pat-pat-pat-pat-pat-pat-pat-pat-pat-pat-pat-pat-pat-pat-pat-pat-pat-pat-pat-pat-pat-pat-pat-pat-p

B. However, on August 23, 2017, the Defendant issued a disposition of non-approval of medical care for official duties (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff on the ground that “the instant injury or disease was caused by excessive occupational stress, rather than by overwork or stress, and it is difficult to recognize a proximate causal relation with the official duties as being caused by the Plaintiff’s physical and physical factors.”

C. The Plaintiff appealed and filed a request for review with the Public Official Pension Benefit Review Committee, but was dismissed on February 8, 2018.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 6, 10, 11, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion has been able to complete the tasks given while serving as a teacher in a decent and responsible nature.

The Plaintiff was under great stress in the process of performing duties on school life records while working almost every day during the vacation period from January to February 2017.

From March 2017, the Plaintiff, as well as the Japanese language classes, has been in charge of the NES (National Educational Administrative Information System) affairs and student life registers. The NES is a system that electronically manages and processes information on the overall matters including school curriculum as well as school life of students, and it is essential that computer work is essential to manage the input information to share it to school personnel and parents, and the Plaintiff, who is newly in charge of the said work, was in charge of the said work, has a great burden. In addition, the Plaintiff, as well as the Plaintiff, was in charge of the said work, was in charge of the said work.