beta
Text
1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The network D (hereinafter “the deceased”) entered the Defendant around 2015 and was dispatched to the Gangwon E-Gun Office around that time, and served as a monitoring personnel of the Gangwon E-Gun CCTV Integrated Control Center.
B. The Deceased’s work is from 09:00 to 18:00, and thereafter, the Deceased’s work was a night work from 18:00 to 09:00 on the following day after the said 24 hours of work, which was a method of performing weekly work again after the said 48 hours of work.
C. At around 07:30 on April 30, 2016, the deceased lost consciousness while cleaning at a resting room in the Gangseo E-Gun CCTV Integrated Control Center, and was in operation and treatment for brain surgery with the right-of-the-hand trauma in the Gacheon Hospital at the Gacheon-si Hospital at the Gacheon-si University, but died on May 5, 2016 due to the progress of cerebral species and the multi-faceted surgery.
(hereinafter “instant accident”). D.
Plaintiff
A is the husband of the deceased, and the children of the deceased B and C are the children of the deceased.
E. As to the instant accident, the Plaintiffs were recognized as an industrial accident and received 18,222,260 won as temporary layoff benefits, etc. from Korea Workers’ Compensation and Welfare Service.
【Ground for Recognition: Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 4 (including a branch number; hereinafter the same shall apply)
(2) Each entry and the purport of the whole pleading
2. Plaintiff’s assertion and judgment thereon
A. The Defendant, who is banned from taking one (1) leave or sick workers, did not allow the Deceased workers, including the Deceased, to leave or sick workers, and the Deceased used the “alternative work system” to have other workers work instead of leave or sick workers on behalf of the Deceased. Before the death, he/she was unable to find a substitute worker due to his/her failure to find a substitute worker.
However, the Defendant had no choice but to continue to work even if the Deceased wants to get sick due to health reasons by prohibiting the commuting system.
As above, the defendant has prevented the leave of absence or sick leave under Article 60 of the Labor Standards Act in an unlawful manner, and the deceased has suffered from overwork and stress due to night work.