logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2015.02.03 2014누2548
유족급여및장의비부지급처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the “judgment on the plaintiff’s assertion of the trial” under the following Paragraph (2). Thus, this is cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Judgment on the Plaintiff’s assertion of the trial

A. The main point of the argument is congenital diseases rather than congenital diseases, and it can be accompanied by cardio-cerebral chronism. The reason why the deceased spawnizes the body of the deceased and spawned the body of the deceased is due to the death of spawnosis, such as nephical urine, etc., and the reason why the deceased suffered from stress and physical activities caused by the death of the deceased and the death of the deceased rapidly aggravated at the rate of natural progress. As such, the deceased’s death has a proximate causal relation with his/her duties.

B. According to the facts of recognition of the first instance court on the board, it appears that the deceased was under considerable stress due to approved injury or disease and its treatment, and that there was a lack of physical activities. In general, it is recognized that stress is one of the persons who are likely to cause severe stress.

However, in addition to the above circumstances of the Plaintiff’s assertion, such fact alone is insufficient to deem that the deceased’s serious condition was rapidly aggravated due to stress and physical activity failure, or that there was no other obvious evidence to acknowledge that there was no other reason.

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion on different premise is without merit.

3. The decision of the first instance court is just and without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

arrow