[2] The meaning of "person who received benefits" under Article 54 (1) of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act

[3] The case reversing the judgment of the court below that the Korea Labor Welfare Corporation, in reality, can exercise the right to claim damages against a third party by the inheritor who is not a person who received the insurance benefits

[2] The Korea Workers' Compensation and Welfare Service, which provided survivors' benefits under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act due to a third party's act, may exercise the right of compensation for damages on behalf of the third party of the beneficiary within the scope of insurance money paid to the beneficiary

[3] The case reversing the judgment of the court below that the Korea Labor Welfare Corporation, in reality, can exercise the right to claim damages against a third party by the inheritor who is not the person receiving the insurance benefits

The court below acknowledged the fact that the deceased non-party 1 was an employee belonging to the Youngjin Comprehensive Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "the non-party company"), and further held that even if the non-party 1 was an employee of the non-party 2 who was ordered to pay the insurance premium in writing from the non-party company as argued by the defendants, the non-party company and the non-party 2 determined that the non-party company becomes an insurance owner of the whole construction including the glass Corporation unless there is a written insurance payment contract between the non-party company and the non-party 2, and on the other hand, acknowledged that the non-party company received the bereaved family's benefits from the non-party company upon delegation of the payment of the bereaved family's benefits to the non-party company. In such a case, the substitute payment received by the bereaved family's bereaved family members is not a compensation for damages, but a substitute payment received by the bereaved family members, and therefore, the amount corresponding to the bereaved family's benefits is not a waiver of the right to claim compensation for damages.

2. As to the third ground for appeal

In accordance with Article 54 (1) of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act, the "right to claim damages against a third party of the beneficiary who can be subrogated by the Korea Workers' Compensation and Welfare Service" is limited to the insurance benefits paid by the Korea Workers' Compensation and Welfare Service. Therefore, on the basis of the lump-sum survivors' compensation, the right to claim damages against lost income can be subrogated, but the right to claim damages against lost income cannot be subrogated by funeral expenses.

Therefore, the court below held that the plaintiff, who paid 100,857,543 won to the non-party 3, the deceased's wife of the deceased, in addition to the lump sum survivors' compensation of KRW 91,00,000,000, funeral expenses of KRW 8,400,000, can subrogate the right to claim damages against lost income even after funeral expenses, is erroneous in the misapprehension of the legal principle of subrogation under Article 54 (1) of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act and failure to exhaust all necessary deliberations as to the existence or absence of the right to claim damages against funeral expenses of the beneficiary. The ground of appeal pointing this out is with merit.

3. As to the fourth ground for appeal

Unless there exist special circumstances, the Korea Workers' Compensation and Welfare Service, which provided bereaved family benefits under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act due to the act of a third party, may exercise the right of compensation for damages against the third party of the beneficiary within the limit of the insurance amount paid to the beneficiary (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 86Meu2948, Jul. 21, 1987; 95Da18772, Jun. 27, 1997; 98Da37491, Mar. 10, 200).

However, the court below held that the Corporation can exercise the right to claim damages against the deceased and their bereaved family members on the premise that it can exercise the right to claim damages against the deceased's other inheritors who are not the beneficiary, and the Defendants who are not the beneficiary of the industrial accident insurance relationship with the injured workers and who are liable for damages due to tort against the victimized workers are liable for damages caused by the accident in this case. Thus, the plaintiff who paid insurance benefits of KRW 99,40,000 to the deceased's wife to the non-party 3, who is the wife of the deceased, can subrogate the right to claim damages against the defendants of the deceased and their bereaved family members within the scope of the above amount of benefits pursuant to Article 54 (1) of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act. Thus, the court below erred in the misapprehension of the meaning of "the beneficiary of benefits" under Article 54 (1)

4. Therefore, the part of the judgment below against the Defendants is reversed, and that part of 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 Lee Jae-in (Presiding Justice)