logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2016.01.21 2015구합67656
산업재해보상보험료징수처분취소청구의 소
Text

1. On June 23, 2014 and July 21, 2014, the Defendant’s total industrial accident compensation insurance fees of KRW 197,156,620 against the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is a person who, at the request of a construction company, operates another workshop rental business that assists its owner and its driver to send a construction site to the construction site.

B. On December 31, 2013, the Defendant determined the Plaintiff’s type of business as “construction machinery management business” under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Premium Rates by Type of Business (No. 2013-56, the Ministry of Employment and Labor Notice No. 2013-56, Dec. 31, 2013), which was publicly notified by the Minister of Employment and Labor, and notified the Plaintiff of the total amount of KRW 235,928,090 in the industrial accident compensation insurance premium in the year 201 and 2012 (hereinafter “industrial accident compensation insurance”).

C. On December 15, 2014, the Defendant reduced the amount of KRW 38,771,470 out of the said KRW 235,928,090 on the ground that the performance rate was not applied to the Plaintiff’s industrial accident insurance premium in 2012.

The Defendant’s payment notice portion regarding KRW 197,156,620, remaining as the Defendant’s reduction disposition among the industrial accident insurance premium in 2011 and 2012 against the Plaintiff on June 23, 2014 and July 21, 2014, is “the instant disposition”.

(D) On September 17, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission seeking confirmation that the instant disposition is null and void, but the said commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim on March 24, 2015. [In the absence of any dispute over grounds for recognition, the entries in the evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, and the purport of the entire pleadings.]

2. Whether the instant disposition is null and void

A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) since the plaintiff performed the work of installing and operating other workshops falling under the construction business under the Korean Standard Industrial Classification by subcontracting the original contractor, the defendant is entitled to the Act on the Collection of Insurance Premiums, etc. for Employment Insurance and Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance (hereinafter "Employment Insurance Act").

The industrial accident insurance premium shall be paid to the original contractor pursuant to Article 9 (1).

arrow