1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On October 23, 2012, the Plaintiff (B) was treated as a public official in charge of planning, business report, election, and trend reporting at the Busan City Community Service Center, and the Plaintiff (B) was treated as a public official in charge of the duty of planning, business report, election, and trend reporting at the Busan Community Service Center. On October 23, 2012, there were symptoms of lack of power to hand on the right hand and arms among the meal drawings, and after retirement, the Plaintiff (B) was treated as a patient at the Busan National University Hospital for Busan National University on the same day.

B. On October 31, 2012, the Plaintiff was diagnosed by the Yangsan National University Hospital as “cerebrovascular Mascopymosis (hereinafter “the instant injury”) and applied for the approval of medical care for official duties. However, on July 7, 2014, the Defendant rendered a decision not to grant medical care on the ground that the instant injury was caused by external factors, such as urology, on the ground that the instant injury was caused by the Plaintiff’s external factors, such as urology.

After that, the Plaintiff received treatment as the instant injury and disease, and voluntarily retired on October 30, 2014.

C. On October 18, 2017, the Plaintiff was diagnosed by the D Hospital that “it is in a state of disability, such as paralysis, oldly disability, and guardian disability, due to the instant injury,” and filed a claim for disability benefits with the Defendant on October 19, 2017 on the ground that the instant injury was caused by a disease caused by official duties.

Accordingly, the defendant against the plaintiff on November 24, 2017, "it is difficult to view that the injury or disease in this case occurred in the Public Official Pension Benefit Council as of July 2, 2014 (hereinafter referred to as the "Public Official Pension Benefit Council") that "it is difficult to view that there was an excessive work beyond ordinary and ordinary scope continuously and even if compared with the person with the person with the person with the person with the person with the person with the duty, even if considering the content of ordinary duties, ② in the health examination report in 2010, it is confirmed that the defendant was confirmed to have received the judgment opinion of "kidne diseases, diseases: hospital therapy: hospital treatment wind, abnormal blood transfusion: consultation : consultation obsium, regardless of the person's official duty, and therefore, it is difficult to view that there was a proximate causal relation with the person with the official duty."