A lawsuit seeking compensation for an illegal act committed by an employee who has paid bereaved family's compensation, etc. under the Labor Standards Act, and the validity of an agreement to waive a claim for compensation for damages not less than a certain amount between the illegal

In a case where the plaintiff was killed due to a collision with the micro-loger who was on board the plaintiff's part of the driver's license, the defendant and his bereaved family members agreed to pay the above deceased's bereaved family members a sum of KRW 1,200,000, and not to make any more than the above claims as compensation for damages caused by the accident. Furthermore, the above bereaved family members may seek compensation for damages and disaster compensation against the plaintiff who is the employer within the scope of the damages unless they are fully satisfied. The above bereaved family members' claim for funeral expenses and compensation for survivors, etc. which the above bereaved family members may claim against the plaintiff pursuant to the Labor Standards Act, shall not be affected by an agreement between the original defendant or the defendant and their bereaved family members, in light of the fact that the Labor Standards Act is a mandatory law.

Article 750 of the Civil Act, Article 82 of the Labor Standards Act

Supreme Court Decision 69Da962 Decided August 26, 1969

Attorney Han-dong, et al., Counsel for defendant-appellee

Attorney Shin Hung-chul et al., Counsel for the defendant

Daegu High Court Decision 76Na492 delivered on November 17, 1976

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. According to the court below's decision, the court below held that the non-party's employer who directly caused the above traffic accident is the non-party's owner, who is the non-party's duty to pay the amount equivalent to the amount paid by the plaintiff to the plaintiff's bereaved family members prior to the above traffic accident, as the non-party's owner of the seat bus No. 5-2786 and the non-party's technical staff on the bus conflict with the micro-ro bus No. 5-26. The plaintiff is the owner of the above microro bus, and the non-party's user who is the above non-party's deceased's bereaved family members, paid 150,000 won for funeral expenses under the Labor Standards Act, compensation for damages under the Civil Act, and 354,696 won for damages under the Civil Act. The court below rejected the judgment that the defendant's bereaved family members and the above bereaved family members are not entitled to claim compensation for damages within the scope of the damages.

2. The above decision states that the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the amount equivalent to 1,200,000 won paid to the bereaved family members of the above deceased's deceased's deceased's deceased's deceased's deceased's deceased's deceased's deceased's deceased's deceased's deceased's deceased's deceased's deceased's deceased's deceased's deceased's compensation liability for the above deceased's deceased's deceased's death is entirely a direct cause of the above deceased's death. Even if the defendant's deceased's deceased's deceased's deceased's deceased's deceased's deceased's deceased's deceased's deceased's compensation is not claimed, if it is insufficient to fully satisfy the whole right to claim damages against the defendants, the bereaved family's compensation or compensation can be claimed against the plaintiff under the Civil Act or the Labor Standards Act to the extent of the shortage. Thus, it is clear that the plaintiff'

I think, even if there was an agreement between the defendant and his bereaved family members such as the defendant's principal, the defendant's payment to the bereaved family members shall not affect not only the defendant's liability for compensation under the Labor Standards Act, but also the liability for compensation under the Civil Act, unless there are special circumstances, to the extent that the defendant's payment to the bereaved family members was not satisfactory. This is justified in the judgment of the court below, on the ground that there was no agreement between the defendant and the defendant as to the compensation for the damage caused by the traffic accident in this case, even if the defendant

This is because, as argued in this paper between the plaintiff and the defendant, there was an agreement between the defendant that the compensation for damages caused by the accident will be entrusted to the defendant, and the defendant paid 1,200,000 won to the bereaved family members prior to the deceased Lee Jong-sung as shown in the agreement, and even if the above bereaved family members agreed not to file a claim, the right to claim for funeral expenses, compensation for bereaved family members, etc. which the above bereaved family members can seek by the Labor Standards Act is not affected by the agreement between the plaintiff, the defendant, or the defendant and the bereaved family members in view of the mandatory provisions of the Labor Standards Act, and the right to claim compensation for damages under the Civil Act, which is naturally affected by the above agreement between the defendant and the above bereaved family members, should be understood through the contents of the agreement, and there is no reasonable reason that the above bereaved family members, who can be understood by the agreement, would have been able to resolve the same in relation to the plaintiff, even in this case, there is no such reason.

3. Although the judgment of the court below is more than the plaintiff's assertion and that there was an agreement between the defendant, it cannot be viewed as an unlawful act affecting the conclusion of the judgment, and there is no error of law by misunderstanding the legal principles as to the claim for damages in the original judgment, and the appeal in this case is without merit.

Therefore, this appeal is without merit, and therefore dismissed in accordance with Articles 400, 395, and 384(1) of the Civil Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges in accordance with Articles 95 and 89 of the same Act regarding the bearing of litigation costs.

Justices Min Jae-chul (Presiding Justice)