logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2019.02.19 2017구합83096
보험급여결정취소 청구의 소
Text

1. The decision that the Defendant rendered to the Plaintiff on September 29, 2017 is revoked.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is the deceased C (hereinafter “the deceased”)’s wife, and the Defendant is a corporation entrusted by the Minister of Oceans and Fisheries with the determination and payment of insurance benefits pursuant to Article 9 of the Act on Accident Compensation Insurance for Fishing Vessels and Fishing Vessels Members (hereinafter “Disaster Insurance Act”).

B. The Deceased is the owner and the captain of D subject to the Act on Accident Insurance for Fishing Seafarers (hereinafter “instant vessel”) and the person who entered into a seafarer labor contract with E (hereinafter “captain”) and worked as cremation in the instant vessel.

C. At around 22:00 on October 12, 2016, the Deceased died while the crew of the instant vessel was divingd with three crew members of the Eastan-gun, who were waiting in the operation at the sea of the 10-day coast of the West-do.

On September 29, 2017, the Plaintiff asserted that he/she died in the course of performing his/her duties, and filed a claim for the payment of bereaved family benefits, etc. under the Fishing Seafarers Disaster Insurance Act with the Defendant. On September 29, 2017, the Defendant determined KRW 111,245,000 equivalent to average boarding wages for the portion of 1,00 days on board as bereaved family benefits pursuant to Article 27(2) of the Fishing Seafarers Disaster Insurance Act, on the ground that

(hereinafter) Pursuant to Article 27(1) of the Fishing Vessels Disaster Insurance Act, the part refusing to pay the bereaved family's benefits for the reason of death in the course of performing duties calculated on average boarding for 1,300 days shall be referred to as "the Disposition in this case"). 【In the absence of dispute, Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 5, 10, and Eul's evidence No. 7, the purport of the whole

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1 Deceased appealed for a period of three days prior to his death. In such a case, the captain of the instant vessel, as the captain of the vessel, has a duty of care to ensure the safety of the life and body of seafarers by resisting the ship at a nearby port to undergo medical examination and treatment.

arrow