1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On September 2, 2002, the deceased B (CB; hereinafter “the deceased”) committed suicide after being appointed as the police from September 2, 2002, while putting up the strings installed at the top of the entrance door at home-to-door entrance on February 14, 2010.

B. On March 11, 2010, the deceased’s spouse filed a claim for compensation for survivors with the Public Official Pension Service. On April 2, 2010, the Public Official Pension Service rendered a disposition on the compensation for survivors’ benefits on the ground that “the deceased’s spouse is considered to have committed suicide due to external factors, such as an in-house, etc., a person who was injured by stress, or who was injured due to the growth process, etc., and on the ground that the deceased cannot be deemed to have committed suicide due to extreme mental or mental disorder or mental disorder caused by reason of official duty, and thus it is difficult to regard the deceased’s death as a disaster on official duty.”

C. On July 13, 2012, the Seoul High Court 201Nu31606 filed an administrative litigation against the Public Official Pension Service seeking revocation of the disposition of compensation for bereaved families’ compensation, and rendered a favorable judgment against the Plaintiff on the ground that “The deceased caused or re-influence due to the deceased’s official duties, such as patrol, while serving in the D Zone as a police official, and may be presumed to have caused suicide due to such depression that the deceased’s normal perception, ability to choose action, and mental suppression capacity significantly deteriorated, and thus, there is a proximate causal relation between the deceased’s official duties and the deceased’s death as a police official.” This judgment became final and conclusive.

The Plaintiff filed an application for registration with the Defendant on January 24, 2013, and on July 17, 2013, the Defendant does not recognize that there exists a proximate causal relationship between the deceased’s death and his duty or education and training.”