[요양불승인처분취소][공2015하,1804]
In a case where: (a) a person who had livedd with his family members for at least three years while working as the head of the farmland bank team A and applied for medical care benefits in order to undergo brain-related diagnosis; and (b) the Korea Labor Welfare Corporation issued an application for non-approval disposition, the case holding that there is a proximate causal relation with the business of B
In a case where Eul, who had worked as the head of the farmland bank team, 51 years of age who had worked with his family for three or more years, lost consciousness at a night and applied for medical care benefits to undergo brain-related diagnosis, and the Korea Workers' Compensation and Welfare Service issued a non-approval disposition, the case holding that the judgment below erred by misapprehending the legal principle on the ground that Eul's brain male was not a causal link between work and work since it was a medical opinion that there was an excessive stress due to frequent business trip that may occur during which Eul lives far away from his family for a long time, and physical skin and mental stress accumulated, such as excessive work, overtime work, and dual work concentrated on time, etc., and it was a cause of the outbreak and aggravation of brain male, and thus, it was a medical opinion that there was a cause of the outbreak and aggravation of brain male, and thus, it was not erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principle on the ground that there was no causal link between work and malopty due to a sudden stress and stress in the work.
Article 5(1) and Article 37 of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act
Plaintiff (Law Firm Chungcheong, Attorneys Hong-ho et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)
Korea Labor Welfare Corporation
Seoul High Court Decision 2013Nu13862 decided October 31, 2013
The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.
The grounds of appeal are examined.
1. The “occupational disease” included in the “occupational accident” under Article 5 subparag. 1 and Article 37 of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act refers to a disease caused by the worker’s occupational injury while performing his/her duties, and there is a causal relationship between his/her occupational disease and the disease. However, such causal relationship does not necessarily have to be explicitly proved in medical and natural science, and if it is presumed that there is a proximate causal relationship between his/her occupational disease and the disease in light of all the circumstances, it shall be deemed that there is proof. In addition, if the primary cause of the disease is not directly related to the performance of his/her duties, even if there is no direct relation with the performance of duties, and at least the occupationalro or stress overlaps with the main cause of the disease and causes or worsens the disease, the causal relationship between his/her occupational health and physical condition should be determined based on the relevant worker’s health and physical condition (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 201Du3014, Apr. 13, 2012).
2. Review of the reasoning of the lower judgment and the record reveals the following facts.
A. From January 1, 2008, until March 11, 2011, the Plaintiff worked as the head of the farmland bank team (Grade II) of the Korea Rural Community Corporation net Macheon-do Transfer Income from the Korea Rural Community Corporation from January 1, 2008 to March 1, 201, in charge of exercising overall control over the affairs of the farmland bank team’s general affairs, finance, and farmland business. On March 201, the Plaintiff mainly performed farmland bank affairs, litigation affairs, and construction of office buildings.
The farmland bank team is a department with the temporal characteristics of duties to attract farmland pension projects, business workout support projects, long-term farmland lease projects, etc. for farmers, four months before the farming period begins.
B. The Plaintiff’s domicile is Hocheon-si, Gyeonggi-si. The Plaintiff was issued as a net mining concession branch on January 1, 2008, and the Plaintiff was living in the apartment located in the apartment located in the Ycheon-si Municipal Ordinance-dong, which was provided by the company away from his family. From around 2011, the Plaintiff lived with Nonparty 1 and Nonparty 2, who is the head of the regional development team at the above accommodation.
C. The Plaintiff, along with the staff in charge, visited the relevant agency and the agricultural site within the jurisdiction, visited the business trip on the day (within 40 km) or going beyond 40 km in order to promote business workout support projects, publicize farmland banking projects, and encourage the repayment of debts to the overdues. The number of business trips during the 68-day period from January 1, 201 to March 9, 201 were 30 times (12, February 14, and March 4).
D. The net mining concession balance was the 16th anniversary of the 18 branches affiliated with the Southern Headquarters of the Agricultural and Fishing Villages in 2010, and the achievement rate was the 19.6% of the objectives of the farmland banking project in 2011 as of March 10, 201.
On the other hand, in relation to the suspicion of embezzlement of farmland purchase funds by farmers in the jurisdiction of the Plaintiff, the police investigation of his/her employees was conducted in around 2010, and the investigation was conducted after being present at the investigation agency, and the employee of the Plaintiff’s branch office was completed by being subject to the investigation on February 2011.
E. The Korea Rural Community Corporation is implementing the five-day work system per week, and the prescribed working hours are 09:00 to 18:00, and the net mining concession balance security system is impossible to confirm individual access details, and there is no objective evidence that the Plaintiff has performed overtime or holiday work in addition to working hours.
However, Nonparty 1, Nonparty 2, and Nonparty 3, the director of the farmland bank team, who had lived with the Plaintiff, worked at around 07:30, and Nonparty 3, the director of the farmland bank team, submitted a written confirmation to the effect that the Plaintiff was entering a lodging room at around 10:0 a day from the beginning of 2011, and Nonparty 4, the director of the branch office, submitted a written confirmation to the effect that the Plaintiff’s ordinary working hours were from 07:30 to 19:30, and Nonparty 5, the director of the farmland bank team, was accompanied by the Plaintiff’s eight-time business trip from the first instance court to 201, and returned to the Plaintiff at least 21:0 to 21:30 on each net.
Meanwhile, according to the Plaintiff’s statement on the business trip (Evidence A No. 17-1) on the same day, the Plaintiff went on the business trip from January 5, 201 to March 8, 2011 on the same 23 occasions. The time for the closure of the business trip was 20:0 and 20:30 respectively, 2 times, 10 times, 21:30 cases, 21:30 cases, 21:30 cases, and 22:0 cases.
In addition, on November 2010, the net mining concession earnings and expenditures carried out a plan to maintain the emergency duty system (such as the implementation of special holiday work and the implementation of special daily work) until the target achievement as part of the metive measures of the farmland bank. Accordingly, the plaintiff carried out the duties, such as deceiving farmers on holidays.
F. On the other hand, the Plaintiff did not properly pay back, and the case where a farmer who entered into a lease contract with the agricultural and fishing village construction project has rapidly increased in 201, and in particular five cases have been terminated on March 8, 201 and March 9, 201, on March 9, 2011, the head of the division, who is a person in charge of the farmland business waves, was in charge of managing the Do substitute lease contract, and the head of the division called “whether the termination of the contract would be increased by this means to manage the Do substitute lease.” Accordingly, the head of the division called “I do not have a spirit because of the work to support the management of the ethmthmm, and even on holidays, it takes place too soon after the termination of the contract,” and the head of the division led to the defect of the horse platform, and the Plaintiff, who caused the appraisal, e.g., the Plaintiff, who datd and ethd and ethd the head of the division.
On March 10, 201, the following day, the Plaintiff appeared to work at a normal time on March 10, 201, but there were inorganic symptoms, such as lack of her ability with the symptoms, and entered a hospital after being treated for outpatients in the central hospital, and entered the hospital. On March 11, 2011, at around 06:50, the Plaintiff was discovered and was transferred to the hospital through the 119 rescue team, and was diagnosed for cerebrs that were the disease of this case.
G. On October 9, 2003, the Plaintiff, who does not smoke, was diagnosed with the meology (original toxicity) at the Gelimology hospital, but did not receive any specific treatment thereafter. On December 22, 2007, the Plaintiff continuously received urology treatment in Dlimcology, etc. after receiving the diagnosis of urcology at the Elimology hospital. According to the doctor in charge of Dlimology, the Plaintiff treated urcology from the above hospital with the urcology from December 11, 2009 to the urcology, and continuously improved the urcology.
According to the results of the medical examination conducted on September 29, 2008, the Plaintiff’s blood pressure measured on September 29, 2008 was 133/86mHg, 146ml, 176mg/dl, 176mp/dl, 176mp/dl. The blood pressure measured on September 14, 2009 was 120/90mHg, the blood pressure measured on September 14, 2009 was 284mpl, the cate for public uniforms was 253mp/dl. The blood pressure measured on October 29, 2010 was 13/90mHg, the blood pressure measured on September 29, 201, the blood pressure was 13/190mpg/dl, the gross pressure was 209mg/dl, and the normal state of health condition was 209m/dl.
H. According to the results of the fact-finding on the director of the Seoul Escar Hospital, if one week working hours exceed 46 to 60 hours, the outbreak rate of cerebrovascular diseases is significantly high. According to the results of the medical record appraisal on the director of the Gscar Hospital, the overwork and stress are the causes of cerebrovascular outbreak and aggravation.
3. 이러한 사실관계와 기록에 의하여 알 수 있는 다음과 같은 사정, 즉 ① 원고는 이 사건 상병 발생 당시 만 51세의 나이로서 2008. 1. 1. 순천광양여수지사로 발령이 난 이래 3년이 넘도록 시흥시에 거주하는 가족과 헤어져 회사가 제공한 순천시 소재 숙소에서 생활하며 주말에야 종종 주거지로 돌아가 가족들을 만날 수 있었던 점, ② 빈번한 출장은 그 거리의 장단을 불문하고 상당한 피로를 수반하는 업무라고 할 것인데, 원고는 2011. 1.부터 이 사건 상병 발생 전까지 휴무일을 포함하여도 거의 이틀에 한 번 정도의 빈도로 출장을 다녔을 뿐만 아니라 출장을 나간 경우에는 대부분 21:00 넘어서야 숙소로 복귀한 것으로 보이고, 출장의 목적도 채무변제 독촉이나 부진한 사업의 홍보 등 정신적인 스트레스와 긴장을 유발할 수 있는 것이었던 점, ③ 원고는 평소에도 07:30경 출근하여 19:30경 퇴근하는 등 규정된 근무시간을 초과하여 근무한 것으로 보일 뿐만 아니라 2010. 11. 이후부터는 순천광양여수지사 차원의 농지은행 부진사업 만회대책의 일환으로 휴일특별근무가 실시되어 휴일에도 농민들을 만나는 등 업무를 수행한 점, ④ 농민들을 대상으로 여러 사업을 유치해야 하는 원고 업무의 시기적 특성상 농번기가 시작되는 4월 이전이 바쁠 수밖에 없으므로, 이 사건 상병 발생 전 수개월간의 업무가 연중 다른 기간에 비해 많아 원고의 육체적·정신적 부담을 가중시켰을 가능성이 있는 점, ⑤ 도내 최하위권 수준인 농지은행사업의 추진실적 부진과 관내 농민의 농지구입자금 횡령 혐의와 관련하여 2011. 2.경까지 진행된 소속 직원에 대한 수사로 인한 수사기관 출석 등도 농지은행팀장인 원고에게 상당한 정신적인 스트레스 요인이 되었을 것으로 보이고, 원고가 무기력한 증상 등으로 병가를 내기 전날인 2011. 3. 9. 있었던 부하 직원과의 이례적인 언쟁도 원고에게 심한 정신적인 스트레스를 주었을 여지가 있는 점, ⑥ 원고는 고혈압과 당뇨병의 기존 질병을 가지고 있었으나, 원고의 혈압이 정상 범위를 크게 벗어나 위험한 수준에 이르렀던 것으로는 보이지 않고, 당뇨병의 경우 원고가 2009. 12. 이후부터 치료를 받아 지속적으로 양호하게 혈당조절을 하였다는 것이며, 원고는 담배를 피우지 않고, 2010년 이후에는 술을 많이 마신 것으로도 보이지 않는 점 등을 앞서 본 법리에 비추어 보면, 원고는 장기간 가족과 떨어져 생활하며 육체적 피로와 정신적 스트레스가 누적되어 오던 중 이 사건 상병이 발생할 즈음 빈번한 출장과 초과근무, 시기적으로 집중된 업무 등 그 건강과 신체조건에 비하여 과중한 업무로 과로하거나 실적 부진과 부하 직원과의 이례적 언쟁 등으로 심한 스트레스를 받았다고 볼 여지가 충분히 있고, 한편 과로와 스트레스는 뇌경색의 발병과 악화의 원인이라는 것이 의학적 소견이므로, 결국 이 사건 상병은 업무상의 과로와 스트레스로 발병하였거나 기존 질환인 고혈압과 당뇨병 증세가 업무상의 과로와 스트레스로 인해 자연적인 진행속도 이상으로 급격하게 악화되어 발생한 것으로서 원고의 업무와 상당인과관계가 있다고 보는 것이 타당할 것이다.
Nevertheless, solely on the grounds indicated in its reasoning, the lower court determined that there was no causal link between the Plaintiff’s business and the Plaintiff’s business. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on causal relationship between the business and the disease under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. The allegation in
4. Therefore, without examining the remaining grounds of appeal, the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the court below for a new trial and determination. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.
Justices Kim So-young (Presiding Justice)