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 deceased B (C life, hereinafter “the deceased”) worked as a cook at a restaurant operated by D Company from January 1, 1999.

On January 2, 2002, the Deceased was used as a self-explosion cerebrovascular while cooking food at the kitchen of the above restaurant, and received treatment. On January 28, 2002, the Deceased was approved by the Defendant as an occupational disease.

B. On April 30, 2005, the Deceased was treated as an approved injury and disease and was determined as grade 1 grade 3 by the Defendant on June 10, 2005 as being “a person whose physical and mental disorder remains at all times with considerable impediment to the function or mental function of the neurosis,” and was determined as a disability grade 3 by the Defendant.

(c)

The Deceased died on April 26, 2015 while receiving medical care at his own home.

The body death report on the deceased was written by the private person as the "male death".

(d)

The Plaintiff, a spouse of the Deceased, died from an occupational accident.

The defendant claimed the payment of bereaved family benefits and funeral expenses.

However, on May 17, 2018, the defendant did not clearly confirm the objective cause of death of the deceased, and there is no objective basis to acknowledge the direct relation of the death caused by the approved injury, such as not observing the symptoms of the approved injury or disease to the extent that the symptoms of the death aggravated.

It is difficult to recognize a substantial causal relationship between the deceased’s death and approved injury and disease.

For the reason that the Plaintiff was entitled to the bereaved family’s benefits and the funeral’s non-land benefits (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

E. The Plaintiff appealed and filed a request for review to the Defendant, but the request for review was dismissed on August 27, 2018.

The plaintiff filed a request for review with the Review Committee for Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance, but the request for review was also dismissed on January 21, 2019.

[Grounds for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, Eul evidence Nos. 2 and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful