1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff’s husband B (hereinafter “the deceased”) is a person who joined C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant company”) and worked as the head of the development project team.

B. At around 18:00 on November 12, 2015, the Deceased was found as a company house located in the office located in the Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Daejeon-dong, Daejeon-gu, as the company house located in the 503 dong-gu, Daejeon-dong, and was found on November 15, 2015 after having died in the said company house.

In the body autopsy report on the deceased, the date and time of death is “the presumption of no more than 02:00 on November 13, 2015,” and the cause of death is written as “unexplicient.”

C. The Plaintiff asserted that the deceased’s death constitutes an occupational accident and claimed the payment of bereaved family’s benefits and funeral expenses. However, on July 26, 2016, the Defendant rendered a disposition to pay bereaved family’s benefits and funeral expenses on the ground that there was no confirmation of the deceased’s name of death, and that there was no sudden and difficult occurrence of a case related to his duties or rapid change in the business environment within 24 hours prior to the deceased’s death, and that there was no increase of more than 30% of the daily work hours prior to the occurrence of the death, and that there was no recognition of a proximate causal relation between the deceased’s death and his/her duties.

hereinafter referred to as "disposition of this case"

(D) The Plaintiff filed a request for reexamination of the instant disposition with the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Reexamination Committee, but the said Committee rendered a ruling to dismiss the Plaintiff’s request for reexamination on February 16, 2017. [Grounds for recognition] The Plaintiff did not dispute, as well as Gap’s 1, 2, and 4 through 6 (each entry and the purport of the entire pleadings including the serial number).

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the private person of the deceased was the deceased's deceased's material condition or the deceased's material condition is a acute fluorial disease, and that the deceased did not sell the sale of the deceased's material condition until the deceased's death. Accordingly, the deceased did not sell the sale of the deceased's material condition.