logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2019.11.01 2018나60052
보상금 등
Text

1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, which orders payment below, shall be revoked.

The defendant.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On February 3, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into an agreement with the Defendant on the deep-sea fishing with the deep-sea fishing with which the Defendant is to embark on the ship C, a vessel owned by the Defendant (hereinafter “instant vessel”) to carry out fishing operations, and on February 9, 2015, the Plaintiff on board the instant vessel.

B. On February 28, 2015, the Plaintiff experienced symptoms, such as the head of the horse and the head of the horse, and entered the Hague on May 26, 2015 and received a medical examination at a local hospital on May 26, 2015, and confirmed that the head and head of the child were abnormal in the local hospital. As a result, the Plaintiff returned to the Republic of Korea on May 28, 2015.

C. As a result of the medical examination conducted at the D Hospital on May 29, 2015, the Plaintiff was diagnosed as a principal injury by “malary scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopics” (hereinafter “instant disease”), and received treatment by November 3, 2015 from that time.

On May 26, 2017, the Plaintiff was diagnosed by D Hospital as “a large part of the cirratulation caused by a light signboard impairment and spine.”

(hereinafter referred to as “instant disability”). (e)

Meanwhile, E Co., Ltd., the insurer of the defendant, is the defendant.

On February 24, 2017, the medical expenses for the treatment mentioned in the subsection were paid, and deposit KRW 6,403,630 as the injury and disease compensation expenses for the instant disease.

[Identification Evidence] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 7, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff on board the instant vessel, while serving as the captain, caused the instant disease to continue to work in an inferior environment, such as the Plaintiff’s height of the pilothouse, which is lower than the Plaintiff’s height, and the Plaintiff continued to work in an inferior environment, such as seeing and on duty, and eventually caused a light signboard disability even after the treatment was completed.

Therefore, the defendant as the plaintiff's employer is the plaintiff's above occupational disease and disability, and ① injury and disease compensation under Article 96 (1) of the Seafarers' Act is eight.

arrow