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 September 1, 2008, the deceased B (hereinafter “the deceased”) joined Hyundai Trade Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Modern Trade”) as a product intermediary and has worked as the product intermediary.

B. At around 05:30 on October 20, 2010, the Deceased, during the time-to-work preparation at home, sent to the emergency room of Seoul National University Hospital, and died on October 27, 2010 on the ground that the status of brain death was omitted, and around 2:20 on October 27, 2010.

According to the death diagnosis report, a private person of the deceased is the pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary Repulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmonary pulmon

C. On March 29, 2011, the Plaintiff, a wife of the Deceased, claimed for the payment of bereaved family benefits and funeral expenses to the Defendant. However, on April 8, 2011, the Defendant rejected the said claim for payment on the ground that the death of the Deceased is not an occupational accident because it is difficult to recognize the relationship with his/her duties due to the following reasons.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant disposition”). Examining the details of work before the death of the deceased, it shall not be deemed that the previous date of the death was confirmed that it had been performed within the ordinary scope of work and that there was a sudden change in the working environment within 24 hours, etc. in connection with the work, and that it was confirmed that it had been carried out the delivery service before the occurrence of the injury, but it was not deemed that the amount of work or the hours of work increased by at least 30 percent of the daily work or that the intensity of work, responsibility, business environment, etc. was changed to the extent that it is difficult for the general public to adapt, and it shall not be deemed that the occurrence of the injury was verified that it was performed with normal work and that it was caused a chronic excessive physical or mental burden that could significantly affect the normal function of the brain bank.”

D. The plaintiff filed a petition for review with the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Reexamination Committee.