Disability benefits and injury compensation annuities under Articles 9, 9-3, 9-5, and 9-7 of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act and Article 80 of the Labor Standards Act.

In full view of the provisions of Articles 9, 9-3, 9-5, and 9-7 of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act and Article 80 of the Labor Standards Act, disability benefits have the nature of compensation according to the degree of occupational loss after completion of treatment, and injury-disease compensation annuities have the nature of compensation for failure to work during the duration of medical treatment (in case of an injury-disease compensation annuity, no temporary disability compensation benefits shall be paid). Accordingly, since the continued medical treatment of an injury-disease compensation annuity is not paid concurrently, the above two benefits shall not be paid concurrently because the injury-disease compensation annuity is not paid for the duration of medical treatment, and medical care benefits shall be paid concurrently to the worker at the insurance facility or medical institution designated by the Minister of Labor when the worker suffers from occupational injury or disease, or if it is inevitable or inevitable, it shall be paid with the same nature as the medical care expenses. If the nature of each of the above insurance benefits is similar to the above, disability benefits and injury-disease compensation annuity is compensation for passive loss among property damage and compensation corresponding to the expenses for medical treatment.

Article 80 of the Labor Standards Act, Articles 9, 9-3, 9-5, and 9-7 of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act

Kim Nam-Nam

Ministry of Labor and the head of the Dong-gu Office

1. On December 24, 1985, the Defendant’s suspension disposition against the Plaintiff, the recovery disposition of KRW 388,964, and the disposition of additional payment of medical care benefits, shall be revoked, respectively.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

3. Two-thirds of the costs of lawsuit are assessed against the defendant, and the remainder one-third of the costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiff.

The defendant's disposition suspending the medical care provided to the plaintiff on December 24, 1985, and the recovery of insurance benefits (medical care benefits amounting to KRW 388,964, injury-disease compensation annuity amounting to KRW 303,703) and the disposition of site payment of insurance benefits ( disability benefits, medical care benefits, and injury-disease compensation annuity) shall be revoked.

The judgment that the lawsuit costs shall be borne by the defendant.

The plaintiff shall be paid to the non-party 1 and insurance benefits No. 2 (Notice of Determination on Payment of Insurance Benefits), No. 3 (Notice of Establishment), No. 4-2 (Written Ruling), No. 7-2 (Written Agreement), No. 7-2 (Written Request), No. 30, and No. 44 (Written Request for Diagnosis), and No. 94) for the whole purpose of pleading, on the ground that the plaintiff shall be paid to the non-party 1 and the non-party 2's remaining amount of damages No. 80, No. 960, Nov. 2, 1983. The plaintiff shall be paid to the non-party 1 and the non-party 2's remaining amount of damages No. 90, Nov. 2, 1983. The plaintiff shall be paid to the non-party 1 and the non-party 2's remaining amount of damages damages damages damages claim 80, Nov. 1, 2005>

The Plaintiff’s disposition of injury or disease-disease compensation annuity was unlawful since it reserved the Plaintiff’s claim for remaining injury or disease-disease compensation annuity against the Plaintiff, and thus, the Defendant’s disposition of injury or disease-disease compensation annuity was unlawful on the ground that it was not affected by the claim for damages under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act, and thus, the Defendant’s disposition of injury or disease-disease compensation annuity was not rendered for 0 years after the above injury or disease-disease compensation annuity was paid to the Plaintiff. Thus, in light of the provisions of Article 9 and Article 11 (3) of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act, if the occupational accident, which caused the Plaintiff’s injury or disease-disease compensation annuity under the same Act, was not paid for 0 years after the above injury or disease-disease compensation annuity’s accident, the Plaintiff’s claim for damages and injury-disease compensation annuity’s remaining injury or disease-disease compensation annuity’s injury-disease compensation annuity’s injury or injury-disease compensation annuity’s injury-disease compensation annuity’s injury or injury-disease compensation annuity’s injury-disease compensation annuity’s remaining 10 years.

Judge Lee Dong-gu (Presiding Judge)