The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. The “public official’s disease” which is the requirement for the payment of bereaved family’s compensation under Article 61(1) of the Public Officials Pension Act refers to a disease caused by the public official while performing his/her official duty, and there is a proximate causal relation between the occurrence of the disease

The causal relationship should be proved by the claimant, but even if it is not necessarily proved by medical or natural science, if the proximate causal relationship is recognized from the normative point of view, it should be viewed as proved.

Therefore, in a case where a public official commits suicide, when a disease on official duty occurs, or an overwork or stress overlaps with the main cause of the disease, resulting in the outbreak or aggravation of the disease, and when it can be inferred that such disease lacks normal awareness ability, choice ability, mental suppression ability, or considerable decrease in the ability to prevent the occurrence of a suicide, and that a reasonable judgment has been caused due to the failure to expect, proximate causal relation between the official duty and the death may be recognized.

In order to acknowledge such proximate causal relationship, comprehensive consideration should be given to the degree of the disease or aftermath of the person who committed the suicide, the general symptoms of the disease, the period of medical care, the possibility of recovery, the age, physical and psychological situation, the surrounding circumstances of the person who committed the suicide, and the circumstances leading to the suicide.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2013Du16760 Decided January 29, 2015). 2. Reviewing the reasoning of the first instance judgment as cited by the lower court and the record reveals the following facts. A.

On October 2006, he was in charge of the five-year master teacher at D Elementary School in 2006, and on the ground that he had been aware of the educational system around the end of October 2006, he was in charge of the other student's back-of-the-day head knife, and accordingly, the South student and his parents thought that the deceased would not become the above student.

3.2