beta
Text
1. On November 12, 2018, the Defendant’s disposition of the site pay for survivors of public officials who died on duty and the disposition of non-approval of medical care for official duties.
Reasons
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On July 1, 1988, the deceased B (CB; hereinafter “the deceased”) was appointed as a police officer on a public bond, and was promoted as of March 1, 2008. On January 23, 2017, the Incheon Regional Police Agency D police station and the head of the intelligence investigation team were transferred to work as the head of the intelligence investigation team.
B. On November 26, 2017, the Deceased died by cutting down the trees from the Cheongnam-dong, Yeonsu-gu, Incheon Metropolitan City Cheongnam-do Cheongnam-do by cutting off the trees into trees.
C. The Plaintiff, the deceased’s spouse, alleged that the deceased’s death during his/her duty constitutes a case where the deceased died of a disease during his/her service, and applied for the payment of survivors
However, on November 12, 2018, the Defendant decided on November 12, 2018 to pay back the deceased’s health insurance benefits to the Plaintiff on the ground that “The deceased’s disease and death can not be recognized due to occupational illness and death because it is difficult to view that there is a proximate causal relation with the deceased’s disease and death,” on the ground that the lower court determined to pay back the site for the deceased who died on duty and to refuse to grant medical treatment for public duties on the ground that “the injury and death of the deceased can not be recognized due to occupational disease and death because it is difficult to view that there is a proximate causal relation with the deceased’s disease and death.”
(hereinafter collectively referred to as "disposition in this case"). 【No dispute exists, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 13, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including serial numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings.
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The Plaintiff’s existing depression of the deceased was caused by occupational stress, etc., and the deceased’s pressure on the performance of duties, such as various malicious civil petitions, lawsuits, and the head of the team raised from April 2017.