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 is the spouse B.

B was appointed by the Ministry of Patriots and Veterans Affairs on July 1, 1994 as a 1969 and worked in the Veterans Affairs Office, the National Cemetery Management Office, the C veteran's Office, etc.

B was transferred to the Civil Service Department (Compensation Division) on April 27, 2015, and from November 27, 2015, it was in charge of the bereaved family registration of persons of distinguished service to the State, the physical examination for determination of disability rating, and the physical examination support for damage from defoliants.

B. B, around 08:00 on September 29, 2016, visited a nearby hospital around 08:30 on the same day, she saw that he/she was working at the C Veterans Administration and was engaged in his/her duties, and was sent back to the emergency room of D Hospital around 09:04 on the same day.

B was diagnosed as having cerebral cerebral typosis (hereinafter “instant disease”) by cerebral typule of inter-modal connection on the same day.

B, while receiving the co-Japanese color test on the same day, died on October 18, 2016 at around 20:14 while receiving treatment in a middle-patient's room.

(hereinafter referred to as “the deceased”). (c)

The Plaintiff asserted that, since November 27, 2015, the deceased was in charge of civil petition affairs, he/she received excessive duties, such as the civil petition response unit, etc., and caused the death of the deceased, and applied for the payment of compensation for survivors of public officials who died on duty and the approval of medical treatment for official duties under the Public Officials Pension Act. However, on December 27, 2016, the Defendant rendered a decision on the non-approval of the compensation for survivors of public officials who died on duty and the non-approval of medical treatment for official duties (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's 1 through 4, 6, 7, and 10 (including Serials), each entry, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that he/she had been in charge of civil petition affairs since November 27, 2015, and had been affected by excessive duties, such as civil petition response units, etc., and resulting in overwork and stress.