2. Following the expansion of the purport of the claim in the trial of plaintiffs 1 and 2, the defendant shall pay to plaintiffs 1 and 2 5 % interest per annum from June 17, 2014 to January 28, 2016, and 20 % interest per annum from January 29, 2016 to the date of full payment.

3. All remaining claims of Plaintiffs 1 and 2 are dismissed.

4. The costs of the lawsuit after the appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

5. Paragraph 2 can be provisionally executed.

【Purpose of Appeal】

① Plaintiff 1 and Plaintiff 2: The same shall apply to the part in which the claims are expanded.

② Defendant: Revocation of the first instance judgment. All of the Plaintiffs’ claims are dismissed.

(a) The relationship between the parties;

① At the time of February 21, 2014, Nonparty 1 (Plaintiffs. 12, 1997) planned to be promoted to the third year as students attending the second grade of △△ High School located in Seo-gu Busan Metropolitan City ( Address omitted). Plaintiffs 1 and 2 were the parents of Nonparty 1, and Plaintiff 3 and Plaintiff 4 were the parents of Nonparty 1. Nonparty 1.

(2) The defendant shall appoint the principals of various levels of schools, such as kindergartens, elementary schools, middle schools, and high schools, located in Busan Metropolitan City as a corporation established by the Superintendent of the Busan Metropolitan City to implement a school safety mutual aid project, as its subscribers, and shall pay mutual aid benefits for various accidents

B. Occurrence, etc. of the instant accident

① On February 21, 2014, at around 14:00, Nonparty 1 entered a toilet in front of the △△△ High School and was used in the future to resolve the physiological phenomenon (hereinafter “instant accident”). At around 16:50, Nonparty 2 and Nonparty 3, a student of the same Ban, discovered Nonparty 1, who was used in the toilet during the process of learning, and discovered Nonparty 1, who was found in the absence of Nonparty 1, was known to the assistant principal of the △△ High School. Nonparty 119 emergency fire fighting team, which received a reported phone at around 17:02, arrived at the △△ High School and sent Nonparty 1, who was in the state of suspension and respiratory suspension, to the emergency room at the ○○ University Hospital.

② Nonparty 1 (hereinafter “the deceased”) arrived at the emergency room of ○ University Hospital at around 17:18, but died, and the person who was directly in charge of the autopsy on the body of Nonparty 1 (hereinafter “the deceased”) is the person who was in charge of the autopsy on the body of Nonparty 1, and the cause is the person who was in charge of the autopsy on the body of the deceased.

③ On February 27, 2014, Plaintiff 1 asserted that the death of the deceased constituted a school safety accident that occurred during educational activities, and filed a claim for the payment of mutual aid benefits (bereaved benefits) with Nonparty 1 to the Defendant. However, on April 2, 2014, the Defendant rendered a decision of mutual aid benefits (determination of payment of consolation benefits) and notified the Plaintiff 1 thereof. On April 21, 2014, Plaintiff 1 filed a request for the review of school safety mutual aid compensation with the Defendant on April 21, 2014, but the Defendant dismissed the instant accident on June 17, 2014 on the ground that it falls under the “accident caused by a disease” that occurred during educational activities due to cerebrism, a wound of the deceased. However, the instant accident was dismissed on the ground that it does not fall under “school safety accident.”

(4) On the other hand, △△△ High School tests for the second year are conducted in the middle examination, the final examination, the evaluation of academic achievement, the evaluation of the combined academic background, the examination of practical English evaluation, the contests in the school, the classical contests in the English language, the English language class, the English hearing, and the English contests.

(c) The deceased's spathrosis;

① From September 11, 2008, the Deceased was treated as brain re-exploitation at the University Hospital in △△△△△△, and the process of treatment was improved, and there was no re-exploitation after the after the aftermathy occurred on June 28, 201, and there was a growing opinion on cerebral wave. The doctor in charge of the Deceased expressed that the treatment was planned to be terminated after the treatment by 2014, with the aftermathy treatment.

(2) An excessive tension, tension, physical skin, severe movement, etc. caused by mental stress shall constitute an element of cerebral ecephism.

라. 관련 법령 ⇒ 별지 기재와 같다.

[Basis] Facts without dispute, Gap's evidence 1 through 7, Gap's evidence 10-1 through 18, Gap's evidence 11-1 through 16, Gap's evidence 12-1, 2, Gap's evidence 13, 14, Gap's evidence 15-1 through 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Occurrence and scope of liability to pay bereaved family benefits, etc.;

(a) Occurrence;

The court's explanation on this part is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and therefore, it cites it as it is in accordance with Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act (However, the "three-year" of Chapter 7 is amended to "two-year").

(b) Scope;

(1) The reduction of king or the rejection of the allegation of comparative negligence

Article 19-2 (1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Prevention of and Compensation for School Safety Accidents (Restrictions, etc. on Payment of Mutual Aid Benefits) amended by Presidential Decree No. 23688, Mar. 30, 2012; and effective April 1, 2012; and Article 19-2 (1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Prevention of and Compensation for Mutual Aid Benefits, the Mutual Aid Association may restrict the mutual aid benefits by providing that, in determining the mutual aid benefits pursuant to Article 35 of the Act, the mutual aid association may pay the beneficiaries the mutual aid benefits, except for the expenses incurred in treating the disease, injury, physical disability, etc. already existed to the beneficiaries due to school safety accidents.”

According to Articles 40 and 75 of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea, legislative power belongs to the National Assembly, and the President may issue Presidential Decree with regard to matters delegated by the Act and matters necessary for enforcing the Act. Thus, the Enforcement Decree of the Act can only stipulate matters delegated by the Acts of the parent corporation or detailed matters necessary for the real enforcement of the Act within the scope stipulated by the Acts, and, unless otherwise delegated by the Acts, it cannot modify or supplement the contents of rights and obligations of individuals provided by the Act or provide new matters not provided by the Acts (see Supreme Court en banc Decision 93Da37342, Jan. 24, 1995, etc.). In addition, the delegation of the Act on matters to be determined by Presidential Decree shall be made within a specific scope. The specific scope should be determined in detail. In order to determine whether such delegation exists, it refers to matters such as the purpose, content and scope of the delegation, and the goals, standards, etc. to be complied with by the administrative legislation in accordance with the delegation. In addition to the form and content of the directly delegated provisions, it should also be considered (see Supreme Court en banc Decision 20086.

Unless otherwise specifically provided for in the Act, the liability to pay benefits under the said Act is not recognized in light of the purpose and purpose of the mutual aid system under the Act on the Prevention of and Compensation for School Safety Accidents, which has the nature of directly compensating for the damage suffered by the beneficiary due to school safety accidents. Unless otherwise provided for in the Act, the liability to pay benefits under the said Act shall not be limited by negligence or scopic consideration. Thus, the Act on the Prevention of and Compensation for School Safety Accidents does not include any other provision that may limit the payment of benefits except for the reasons provided for in Article 43, and Article 39(2) provides that matters necessary for the payment standards, etc. for bereaved family's benefits may be prescribed by the Presidential Decree in light of the legislative purport, purpose, and contents of the above provision, and it cannot be deemed that the Enforcement Decree separately provides for the reasons such as the restriction on payment of benefits

Therefore, Article 19-2(1) and (2) of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Prevention of and Compensation for Accidents at School is merely an invalid provision without delegation of the law, inasmuch as the parent law does not have any provision or delegation of the provision on restriction on payment to the parent law.

(ii) Survivors’ benefits (Article 39 of the Act on the Prevention of and Compensation for School Safety Accidents, Article 18, 19, 20 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act);

(A) Actual income;

○ Personal Information: Women, Date of birth on January 12, 1997 (the 17 years of age 17 and 9 months of age at the time of the instant accident) and the extent of 67.84 years of age;

○ Employmentable period: From January 12, 2017, the deceased’s age of 20 years to January 11, 2057, the day before he/she reaches the age of 60, the maximum working age.

○ Average Wage: 1,970,452 won (i.e., the unit wage of an ordinary worker in the second half of 2015 x 22 days in the report on the actual status quo of wages issued by the Korea Construction Association)

○ Deduction for living expenses: 35% (Article 20(1) [Attached Table 7] of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Prevention of and Compensation for School Safety Accidents

○ Calculation: 307,390,512 won = = 1,970,452 won (=89,566 won x 22 days) ¡¿ 240's identification coefficient (i.e., 274.402 - 31.754, 31.7554; 240's identification coefficient exceeds 240), 65% x 65%, and 5% of the deceased's death at the rate of 5% per month as of February 21, 2014)

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without a partial dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 18-1 and 2-2, experience, significant facts to this court, the purport of the whole pleadings

(B) Consolation money (Article 19 [Attachment 6] of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Prevention of and Compensation for School Safety Accidents

○○ 20 million won for the Deceased

○ Plaintiffs 1 and 2, respectively, KRW 10 million

○ Plaintiffs 3 and 4, respectively, KRW 2.5 million

(3) Funeral expenses (Article 40 of the Act on the Prevention of and Compensation for School Safety Accidents).

○ Plaintiff 1: 8,416,600 won (i.e., the unit wage rate of ordinary workers in the second half of 2014 x 84,166 won in the investigation report on the actual status of wages issued by the Korea Construction Association x 100 days, as sought by the said Plaintiff)

(4) Inheritance relations

○○ Plaintiff 1 and Plaintiff 2: Inheritance: Each 163,695,256 won (=327,390,512 won (=income of KRW 307,390,512 of the deceased’s lost income + 20,000,000 for consolation money of the deceased) ¡¿ Inheritance 1/2)

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff 1 the deduction benefit of KRW 182,11,856 (i.e., KRW 163,695,256 in inheritance + KRW 163,695,256 in inheritance + KRW 8,416,60 in funeral expenses), Plaintiff 2 the deduction benefit of KRW 173,695,256 (i.e., KRW 163,695,256 in inheritance + KRW 163,695,256 in inheritance + KRW 10,000 in inheritance + KRW 163,695,256 in inheritance), Plaintiff 3, and Plaintiff 4 at the 14th day after the date on which the Plaintiffs claimed the payment of the deduction benefit, 5% per annum under the Civil Act from June 17, 2014 to the date on which the first instance judgment was sentenced, and 20% per annum per annum from the next day to the date of full payment).

Therefore, the plaintiffs' claim of this case is justified (However, part of the claim for damages for delay against plaintiffs 1 and 2 is dismissed), and the judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed, and the plaintiff 1 and 2's claim for damages for delay is accepted, but part of the claim for damages for delay by the above plaintiffs is dismissed.

(attached Form omitted)

Judges Bocheon-ho (Presiding Judge)