1. On July 9, 2013, the Defendant’s disposition of bereaved family benefits and funeral site pay to the Plaintiff is revoked.

2...

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On June 26, 2012, the deceased B (Cre, hereinafter “the deceased”) was used in inspecting the washing machine of a political network and fishing gear at the Ewing Station located in Gosung-gun D located in Sungsung-gun, and was sent back to the Young Medical Center, but died at the heart.

B. The Plaintiff, a wife of the Deceased, asserted that he died due to occupational reasons while serving as a worker of F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”), and claimed the Defendant for the payment of bereaved family benefits and funeral expenses due to the death of the Deceased.

C. However, on July 10, 2013, the Defendant rendered a disposition of survivors’ benefits and funeral site pay (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff on the following grounds.

F The labor contract and the labor contract submitted to the Gosung Police Station at the F are different, and the signing of the deceased on the employment contract and the payment ledger of daily work labor cost submitted by facsimile and originals are different, and G as witness is claimed as a F employee, but it is not consistent with each other in full view of the data reported in the local newspapers and the data submitted to the Gosung Police Station.

In addition, 2.30,00 won per day of the deceased who performs on-site supervision is considerably high in terms of social norms, and the employment contract submitted to the Gosung Police Station is stated as 1.50,00 won, and the employment contract is deemed to have been made after the death of the deceased and it is not reliable.

Therefore, it is difficult to regard the deceased as a worker under the Labor Standards Act, and it is judged that the deceased is an individual or a partner who has been subcontracted by F with respect to the work in the Gosung-gun.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 18 and 19, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the deceased died due to occupational reason while serving as an employee of F. The deceased’s death is the same.