1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On July 19, 2012, the deceased C (hereinafter referred to as “the deceased”) suffered from an accident falling down at a platform at a height of 6 meters (hereinafter “instant accident”) and obtained approval of the medical grade of this case (hereinafter referred to as “the instant accident”) with the exception of an obvious eromatic typosis, satisfying, i.e., satisfying, sating, pulmonary satisfying, the upper right upper eroke, the upper right upper pelfy, 1-9, 1-9, 1-9, 1-2, 1-3, 1-2, 3-2, 2012, 3-2,000,000,0000,000 won and 6-2,000,000,000 won and 6-2,000,000).

B. On October 27, 2015, the Deceased was found to have died in his/her residence and a private person was found to have a chronic alcohol certificate (presumed).

C. Accordingly, on April 18, 2016, the Plaintiffs, who are the deceased’s children, claimed for the payment of survivors’ benefits and funeral expenses to the Defendant. On June 9, 2016, the Defendant rendered a disposition of survivors’ benefits and funeral funeral expenses (hereinafter “instant disposition”) against the Plaintiffs on the ground that “the deceased’s existing occupational accident and death in the deceased and there is no proximate causal relation between the deceased’s previous occupational accident.”

In response to the instant disposition, the Plaintiffs filed a request for examination with the Defendant, but the Defendant dismissed the request for examination on October 18, 2016.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2 and 4, the purport of whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Deceased’s assertion that caused the instant accident, which is an occupational accident, was caused by the instant recognition injury, and drinking was caused by it.