[2] The case holding that in a case where Party A was appointed as a branch, and Party A was committed suicide after having worked in the middle pressure after having diagnosed the depression of business performance, etc. with stress, etc., after having been diagnosed of the depression of heavy stressed symptoms, etc., and having been continuously treated with a mental and medical treatment, proximate causal relation can be acknowledged between Party A’s work and death, and that there is a possibility that individual vulnerability had partly influenced the resolution of suicide, and that there is no mental symptoms in the immediately preceding suicide, and that there is no other possibility that individual vulnerability had influenced the resolution of suicide

[2] The case holding that in case where Party A was appointed as a branch, and Party A was committed suicide after receiving a diagnosis of a serious stress on business performance and stress, etc., and after having worked in the remaining part of his occupational burden, the court held that in light of the following circumstances: (a) considering the records of the deceased’s emotional distress, suicide process, etc. in the process of the outbreak and development of depression, Party A’s emotional distress such as his emotional distress, it can be found that there was a proximate causal relation between Party A’s work and death, on the ground that Party A’s emotional distress was placed in a situation to the extent that it is impossible to expect reasonable judgment due to a significant decline in his ability of recognition, behavior selection, mental suppression, and so on; (b) even though Party A did not have worked in an extremely harsh environment, such as occupational stress and continuous pressure from the other branch, it is not likely that Party A’s personal vulnerability such as the deceased’s sexual character, and thus, it does not affect Party A’s symptoms immediately before and after suicide.

1. The term “occupational accident” under Article 37(1) of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act refers to the injury, disease, physical disability, or death of an employee who was caused by his/her duties during the performance of his/her duties, and there is a causal relationship between his/her duties and the disaster. The causal relationship must be proved by the assertion of such causal relationship. However, in cases where there is no clear causal relationship from a normative point of view, and where proximate causal relationship is acknowledged from a normative point of view, there should be proof. Therefore, if it can be inferred that an employee’s severe occupational stress and mental pain led to suicide due to the aggravation of depression, and so on, the normal perception, ability to choose action, and ability to restrain mental disorder significantly drops so that reasonable judgment could not be expected, a proximate causal relationship exists between the duties of the deceased and the death of the deceased. Although in the process, personal vulnerability, such as the personality of the deceased’s inner nature, etc., such as suicide had been affected by the resolution on suicide, or immediately before suicide, refund, and injury caused by the death, etc.

2. Review of the reasoning of the first instance judgment cited by the lower court and the evidence duly admitted by the lower court reveals the following facts.

A. On January 6, 1992, the Nonparty, who is the husband of the Plaintiff (hereinafter “the deceased”), was working as a bank member at ○○○○○○○○○○○○○ (hereinafter “instant company”) and was appointed as the head of △△ branch on January 17, 2013 and performed overall tasks such as credit and receiving business, customer management, etc. In order for the instant company to report the establishment of countermeasures against the branch with poor credit performance, etc. on several occasions from February 2013, and the △△ branch was also included in the subject. However, the △△ branch was continuously demanding the reduction of the loan interest rate.

B. On May 27, 2013, the Deceased was diagnosed as “comploitic fluor’s fluoral fluor’s fluor’s fluor’s fluor’s fluor’s fluor’s fluor’s fluor’s fluor’s fluor’s fluor’s fluor’s fluor’s fluor’s fluor’s fluor’s fluorial fluor’s fluor’s fluorial fluor’s fluor’s fluor’s fluor’s fluor’s fluor.” The medical records at the time

C. The Deceased worked on June 13, 2013. According to the employee’s statement, the face at the time was open, the body was not good, and it was unbrupted and unstable. At around 11:10, the Deceased called “at around 11:10, she went out of the company and went out of the company.” The Deceased called “I will die at the core so far as I will die. I will immediately go back.” At around 13:50. At around 14:12, the Deceased was discovered after drinking agrochemicals in the gardening pool located in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government ( Address omitted) and then hanging trees.

D. The deceased left the two books before the suicide. The statements found at the suicide scene indicate a fluorous mind about family members, and the statements found at the house include the following: “Is children, Iss, Issss, Isss, Iss, and Isss, Is, Is, Is, do not work at the business site without an absolute reason. Is, Is, Is, Is, Is, and Iss, Iss, Is, Iss, and Iss, will be able to follow the fluor's fluor's fluor's s

E. The director of the mental health clinic of the first instance court who treated the deceased showed symptoms, such as depression, suicide, salvance, uneasiness, and concentrative depression at the time of internal investigation, and complained of stress related to his duties after the issuance of the branch office. The deceased at the time of the last diagnosis on June 3, 2013, expressed his opinion that it would have a serious trouble in normal perception ability and ability to choose action, and that according to the result of the first instance court’s medical record appraisal commission for the Samsung Seoul Hospital director, the professor of the Samsungnam Hospital’s mental health department appears to have shown a tendency to work in the bank on the record, and it was difficult to assume the burden of daily life on the deceased at the time of his or her work, and there was no possibility that he or she would have a serious risk to suffer from suicide, such as occupational stress and property stress, and there was no fear that he or she would have a serious risk to suffer from suicide due to his or her mental disorder.

3. We examine these facts in light of the legal principles as seen earlier.

As the deceased was appointed as the head of △△ branch and was in general in charge of the credit and the fund-raising business of the branch, it seems that he/she had experienced considerable pressure on the business operation and performance due to the fact that he/she received a continuous demand from major customers to reduce the loan interest rate, etc. This pressure leads to the deceased’s diagnosis of the “serious depression with no mental symptoms,” etc. for a period of four months after he/she worked as the head of the branch. As seen earlier in the process of counseling with a psychiatrist, it is reasonable to view that the deceased’s suicide had been aggravated due to occupational burden and stress on the business operation after being appointed as the head of △△ branch, etc. As seen earlier, it is reasonable to deem that the deceased’s suicide had been aggravated due to the occupational pressure and stress on his/her own, even if he/she had been under continuous treatment with his/her own mental pressure.

In full view of all the circumstances, such as the deceased’s emotional content, suicide process, etc., the deceased’s normal perception ability, ability to choose action, and mental suppression ability, may not be expected due to depression, thereby resulting in suicide. As such, proximate causal relation between the deceased’s work and the deceased’s death may be acknowledged. Although the deceased’s work and the deceased did not have worked in a particularly harsh environment, such as where he/she had excessive work compared to other branches, or where he/she had continued pressure and injury from the company of this case, it is probable that personal vulnerability, such as the physical nature of the deceased, which he/she received in addition to the objective factor of occupational stress, has partially influenced the deceased’s resolution on suicide. Meanwhile, it does not change on the ground that there was no mental disorder, such as exchange, loss, and excessive speech and behavior immediately before the suicide.

4. Nevertheless, the lower court determined that there is insufficient evidence to acknowledge the proximate causal relationship between the deceased’s work and the death. In so determining, it erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on proximate causal relationship, thereby failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. The allegation in the grounds of appeal

5. Therefore, the lower judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Jo Hee-de (Presiding Justice)