logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2018.03.29 2017구합75361
유족급여및장의비부지급처분취소
Text

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff’s father, the father of the Plaintiff (hereinafter “the deceased”), was a person who worked as Pyeongtaek-si street cleaners from January 1, 2002, and was injured by a traffic accident that occurred while working in P.M. on April 30, 2012 due to a traffic accident that occurred while on duty in P.M., the Plaintiff’s father, suffered from an injury, such as an exposure to credit, an exposure to credit, etc.

B. The Deceased was determined on July 1, 2016 that “the instant approved injury” was an occupational accident and received medical care until June 30, 2016 after obtaining approval of the occupational accident, and on July 1, 2016, subparagraph 3 of Grade 1 of the disability grade (a person who, as a result, needs to be provided with constant nursing care at all times, has a significant obstacle to the function of the new system).

C. On May 16, 2017, the Deceased died at the D Hospital of Seoul Special Metropolitan City on May 15:10, 2017, and the death diagnosis report on the Deceased is written by the person directly in charge of multi-surry, pre-sarry, and pre-sarr cancer.

On July 20, 2017, the Plaintiffs claimed for the payment of survivors’ benefits and funeral expenses to the Defendant. However, on August 4, 2017, the Defendant rendered a decision on the payment of survivors’ benefits and funeral funeral expenses on the ground that “the deceased is deemed to have died as an individual disease (culatory cancer) unrelated to the approved branch rather than the aggravation of the instant approved disease.”

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). 【No dispute exists, Gap’s evidence 1, Gap’s evidence 2-1, 4, Eul’s evidence 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. Although the Plaintiffs’ death diagnosis report on the deceased is indicated as a private person, the gate cancer is merely one of the causes of the death, and the gate cancer had already occurred before the deceased’s death due to the cause of the death, and it was impossible for the deceased to independently establish and walk, and the deceased’s action for daily life.

arrow