beta
(영문) 서울고등법원 2014.11.05 2014누764

최초요양불승인처분취소

Text

1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Details of disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is an employee who performs duties, such as electric power distribution, etc., in the Yellow Power Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “west Power”).

On January 3, 2011, in order to work at around 07:00, the Plaintiff applied for medical care benefits to the Defendant that the instant injury was caused by occupational accidents. However, on March 30, 2011, the Defendant did not constitute an accident that occurred during work using a means of transportation provided by the business owner or a means of transportation deemed to have been provided by the business owner, and thus, cannot be deemed to have been under the control and management of the business owner at the time of the accident.

‘The instant disposition was taken for reasons of non-approval of the medical care.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 3 and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff should work up to 07:30 of the ordinary place of work. In full view of the fact that there is no separate means of transportation provided for commuting from the west Power, even though the first vehicle is not possible to arrive at the work hours due to the demand of approximately two hours when using public transportation, such as buses, etc., the instant accident constitutes a case where there is no room for choice on the method, route, etc. of commuting, and thus, the instant injury’s disease constitutes occupational accident.

In addition, it is not so.

Even though the Western Power, which is the business owner, is well aware of the plaintiff's disaster, the injury of this case, even if it is unreasonable to see the same, such as electric poles or heavy power transmission lines, has aggravated the injury of this case. Thus, the injury of this case constitutes an occupational accident.

(b) judgment;