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 July 27, 2013, the Plaintiff’s husband’s deceased B (hereinafter “the deceased”) is a worker employed in the E Apartment Construction Site located in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant apartment site”) after entering D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant company”).

B. Around 09:50 on October 22, 2013, the Deceased was used by himself and sent to a nearby hospital by the 1119 rescue unit, but was directly dead on October 31, 2013, the Deceased died of the “cerebral Growth Bribery”, the intermediate line events, and the “cerebral cerebral cerebrs, brain side species, brain side species, and brain pressure increase.”

C. On June 9, 2014, the Plaintiff applied for the payment of survivors’ benefits and funeral expenses to the Defendant on the ground that the deceased’s death constituted an occupational accident. However, on July 28, 2014, the Defendant rendered a decision on survivors’ benefits and funeral funeral expenses on the ground of the deliberation by the Seoul Committee for Determination of Seoul Occupational Disease on the ground that “it is difficult to deem that there was any occupational fault and stress that may cause injury to the deceased, and that it is difficult to recognize the relationship with his/her duties since he/she is determined as an outbreak due to high blood pressure, inter-regional injury, etc., which

(hereinafter “instant disposition”) D.

On December 16, 2014, the plaintiff filed a petition for review with the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Reexamination Committee.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4 through 6, Eul evidence No. 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion should handle the weight of stone due to the nature of the work in charge, so physical high power, and in the case of misunderstanding, cutting, or attaching stone, the Plaintiff should destroy or re-work the stone, and accordingly, the Plaintiff’s mental stress was excessive.

Furthermore, working hours and robbery of the deceased have rapidly increased for the four weeks immediately preceding the death, and during October 2013, which was around the time of death.