logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2011.10.21 2011구단3244
평균임금정정신청및보험급여청구서부지급처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On June 1, 1989, the Plaintiff was employed as a member of the Mining Center and retired on September 30, 1990, and thereafter was diagnosed as pneumoconiosis on September 20, 199, and was determined as eligible for medical care under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act.

B. In paying insurance benefits to the Plaintiff, the Defendant calculated the first special average wage as KRW 47,544.07 in accordance with the special case for calculating the average wage for a person suffering from an occupational disease at the time of diagnosis of pneumoconiosis (hereinafter “special case’s average wage”), and applied the increased or decreased amount as the average wage.

C. From July 190 to September 19 of the same year, the Plaintiff confirmed that the Plaintiff’s standard monthly wage on the certificate of payment of national pension contributions is KRW 660,000. As such, the Plaintiff calculated the average wage at the time of retirement based on this basis and corrected the increased or decreased wage as the first average wage until the date on which the occupational disease was confirmed. Based on this, the Plaintiff filed a claim for the difference between the average wage and the insurance benefits to the effect that the difference would be paid after increasing

On March 26, 2010, the Defendant: (a) accepted the Plaintiff’s application for correction of the average wage on the ground that the standard monthly wage for the national pension is only a section income that sets the payment standard for the national pension premium; and (b) did not constitute the employee’s actual wage; and (c) rejected the payment of the difference

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. According to Article 5 subparag. 2 of the Plaintiff’s notice of special cases for calculating the average wage, where the total amount of the wage is not clear, the average wage shall be calculated by taking into account the matters concerning the monthly average wage amount reported under the National Pension Act, and in light of the purport of the average wage system that reflects the wage to the maximum extent possible, the national

arrow