Where liability for compensation for survivors conflicts with that for damages;

A. In a case where the employee's compensation liability under the Labor Standards Act and the State Compensation Act (or tort under the Civil Act) concurrently competes with the employee's compensation liability, even if the employee paid the victim's compensation to the injured party, he cannot claim compensation for the damages that he paid to the injured party for the tort without subrogation of the injured party.

B. Where the liability for compensation of an employee under this Act and the liability for damages under the State Compensation Act (or tort under the Civil Act), even if the employee paid the compensation for the bereaved family to the injured party, the employee cannot claim compensation for the compensation paid to the injured party for the direct tort without subrogation of the injured party to the State.

Article 2 of the State Compensation Act, Article 82 of the Labor Standards Act, Article 83 of the Labor Standards Act, Article 87 of the Labor Standards Act

Plaintiff Company

Countries

Busan District Court Decision 65Na649 delivered on July 22, 1966

The original judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Daegu High Court.

The grounds of appeal by the Defendant Litigation Performers shall be examined.

According to the judgment of the court below, the court below confirmed that the plaintiff company's bereaved family member under the Labor Standards Act was an employer under Articles 82 and 83 of the same Act, and that the plaintiff company's bereaved family member was paid KRW 100,000 and KRW 9,000 for funeral service expenses, as long as the ground for the above accident caused the plaintiff company's compensation for survivors' compensation and funeral service expenses was the tort of the non-party 2. Thus, it is clear that the defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiff company for the damages of the company due to the payment of each of the above money to the plaintiff company.

In light of the legislative intent of the Labor Standards Act, the liability of accident compensation under the Labor Standards Act is for balanced development of the national economy. It is clear that the employer did not follow the cause of the worker's occupational accident, and the compensation is to compensate pursuant to the provisions of the same Act. The tort (or the State Compensation Act) requires the offender or the user to compensate all the damages caused by the accident. Even if there are raw milk of the liability, it is different from the raw milk of the same accident, it is possible for the employer to seek compensation for damages caused by the accident and compensation (the victim will be sufficiently entitled to compensation for all the damages). If it is proved that there is a problem that the employer would have been exempted from the liability under the provisions of the Civil Procedure Act without considering the relationship between the non-party 1 and the compensation for damages caused by the accident and the non-party 1's occupational accident and the compensation for damages caused by the non-party 1's occupational accident, the employer would have to seek compensation for damages caused by the non-party 1's occupational accident.

[Judgment of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) Na-man (Presiding Judge)