2016Nu77164 Revocation of revocation of the payment of bereaved family's benefits and funeral expenses.

A

Korea Labor Welfare Corporation

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2015Guhap68017 decided November 10, 2016

May 30, 2017

June 20, 2017

1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. On January 21, 2015, the disposition that the Defendant rendered to the Plaintiff on January 21, 2015 is revoked.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Details of the disposition;

【Evidence A’s Evidence Nos. 1, 3 through 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

A. On March 13, 2014, while working in Ansan-si E located in Ansan-si, a member of the Plaintiff’s husband (hereinafter referred to as “the Plaintiff’s husband”) was involved in an accident in cleaning the crowdfunding and entering it into the roller (hereinafter referred to as “accident in this case”), the Plaintiff’s husband’s serious sloping pressure damage to the part of the upper part of the front part of the front part of the front part of the front part of the front part of the front part of the front part of the front part of the front part of the front part of the back of the back, damage to the sloping pressure of the upper part of the upper part of the upper part, damage to the right part of the upper part of the upper part of the back, damage to the sloping of the upper part of the upper part of the back part of the front part of the front part of the back part of the back part of the back part of the back part of the upper part of the back part of the back part of the upper part of the back part of the upper part of the right part of the upper part of the water.

B. After the occurrence of the instant accident, the Deceased received medical care at the F Hospital located in Ansan-si, Seoul Metropolitan Government, and G Hospital located in Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul. On October 4, 2014, the Deceased committed suicide after installing a reduction at the warehouse wooden pole at the warehouse of G Hospital (presumed time) on October 4, 2014.

C. Although the Plaintiff claimed the payment of bereaved family benefits and funeral expenses to the Defendant, the Defendant rendered a disposition rejecting the payment on the ground that the deceased’s suicide was not recognized as an occupational accident (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on January 21, 2015, on the ground that there is no medical basis to deem that the deceased did not receive a mental treatment in relation to the instant disaster or injury, and that there was no other mental disorder.

D. The Plaintiff filed a request to review the instant disposition with the Defendant, but the request for review was dismissed on April 20, 2015.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

(a) Relevant statutes;

It is as shown in the attached Form.

(b) Fact of recognition;

【Evidence Gap’s evidence evidence Nos. 5 through 11, Eul’s evidence Nos. 1 through 3 (including all of the branch numbers in the case of family numbers), the testimony of the witness of the trial court H, the result of the entrustment of the examination of medical records to the Korean Medical Association of the first instance court, and the purport of the whole pleadings

1) Details of the deceased’s medical treatment and treatment

A) On March 14, 2014, the deceased suffered from the instant disaster, and was diagnosed as being able to be duplicated due to the likelihood of the occurrence of the duplicated stye, damage to severe skins, and the future honorable treatment due to the severe pressure traging and towing damage, and the price of the arms is extremely poor, and unstable as the price of the arms is all bupe, and is too severely bupated and unreased, and then the future honored.

B) In F Hospital on March 14, 2014, the Deceased received an influoral refluoral refluoral bluoral bluoral bluoral bluoral bluoral bluoral bluoral bluoral bluoral bluoral bluoral bluoral bluoral bluoral bluorals, on April 9, 2014; on April 21, 2014; on May 12, 2015; and was transferred to G Hospital on June 5, 2014.

C) On September 16, 2014, the Deceased was diagnosed by G Hospital on the following: (a) 20 degrees of a bend of the right hand; and (b) 50 degrees of a bend of the elbow; and (c) 50 degrees of a elbow; and (d) 50% of the fingers of the fingers.

D) After suffering from the instant disaster, the Deceased’s appeal of heavy pains on the part of the sick and wounded during the treatment process, lushe was melted or injected with lushein, lushein, lushes, and tetral, etc. used in the same dynamics of heavy dust or heavy lusium, and lusium was fluored by lusing lusiums even with lusium symptoms. In particular, since August 2014, 2014, the time of death was frequent.

E) There is no record received by the Deceased as a psychiatrist before the instant accident occurred.

2) After the occurrence of the instant accident, the Deceased’s speech and behavior at the time of suicide

A) The Deceased was of a flat and resistant nature, and physical strength was dried. After the operation, there was a decrease in the number of horses after the operation, and there was no response to the surrounding persons, such as that there was no adequate response to the horses, and there was a difficulty in getting out of the boom at night, and there was a decrease in the weight of the patient’s clothes immediately before the death.

B) Unlike during the period of treatment and recuperation, the Deceased saw a lot of people as her body of injury and aftermath during the period of treatment and recuperation, and tried to see that the Deceased her chest was fright around, or the Plaintiff was frighten, for the reason that her chest was frighted by drinking away several times, or that her chest was fright at the time of drinking, or the Plaintiff was frighten, or that she was frighten with shamp and shamp during the showering, and that she was fright to die by drinking her words and her wife.

C) After being hospitalized in G Hospital, the Deceased said that more pains are alleviated than the first time to the nurse, and that it is good for the nurse. However, on the other hand, after the operation of the instant injury and disease, the Deceased talked that he would sell to the head of the F Hospital or to the neighbors of the F Hospital or people around the heart without relaxinging pains after the operation of the instant injury and had promised to give treatment to the G Hospital in Seoul on the day of suicide according to the doctor’s request for treatment for extreme pain treatment.

(iii) medical opinions

A) Opinions of deliberation by the Defendant’s advisory society

Since the deceased did not have the ability to receive medical treatment from a mental disorder, and there is no ground that his mental disorder caused suicide, it is difficult to recognize the causal relationship between the disaster in this case and the deceased's suicide.

B) Results of requesting appraisal to the Korean Medical Doctor Association of the first instance court

(1) The appraisal of the person’s intention and purpose

The pain of the Deceased’s appeal is deemed to fall under the level of 8 to 9 out of the 10th 10th 1st 10th 1st 1st 10th 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 2nd 8th 8th 10th 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 2nd 2nd 2nd 2nd 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 2nd 2nd 1st 2nd 1st 2nd 1st 2nd 1st 2nd 1st 2nd 2nd 2nd 2nd 1st 1st 2nd 2nd 2nd 2nd 2nd 2nd 2nd 2nd 2nd 2nd 2nd 2nd 2nd 2nd 2nd 2nd 2nd 2nd 3.

(2) An appraisal of a psychiatrist

In spite of continuous pharmacologic treatment, the deceased is presumed to have been considerably difficult due to the pain and satisfy on the right side, etc., and there is no possibility that the depression might have been inferred in the overall situation. However, there is no mentioning of symptoms related to depression other than satchosis in the nursing record book. In order to alleviate pain, the deceased was satched with satchine and satisfy, etc. frequently administered with non-narcotics satisfy, etc. to alleviate pain, and there was no appeal against side effects or treatment volume due to satchines, etc., which fall under the category of satch effects or treatment volume, and satisfys also were taken once a day, so it is presumed that the deceased exceeded the recommended capacity, and that there was no appeal or observation of such side effects. In the case of the deceased, it is difficult to view that there was no possibility that suicide might have been satisfynch effects due to continuous suicide and treatment without severe side effects.

C. Determination

1) The term “occupational accident” under Article 37(1) of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act refers to the injury, disease, physical disability, or death of an employee who was caused by his/her duties during the performance of his/her duties. As such, the causal relationship between his/her duties and the disaster should be proved by the assertion of such causal relationship. The existence of such causal relationship should be determined by the existence of proximate causal relationship from a normative point of view rather than by explicitly proving medical and natural science. Therefore, in cases where an employee’s death resulted in death due to an act of suicide, the disease occurs due to his/her occupational or occupational injury or stress overlaps with the main cause of the disease, and the occurrence or aggravation of the disease is likely to occur or aggravated, and a reasonable judgment may be acknowledged solely on the ground that there is a considerable decline between the duties and the death (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 201Du16281, Apr. 1, 2012).

2) Examining the aforementioned facts in light of the legal principles as seen earlier, the Deceased’s physical damage caused by the instant accident during the performance of his/her duties during a period of six months. In addition, the Deceased’s physical damage caused by the operation and treatment, and, despite multiple operations, it is difficult to expect that he/she would be recovered at a level similar to normal symptoms, such as reduction of physical ability, reduction of sense of view, and low scarcity, and thus, he/she seems to have been scarcity and uneasiness. Moreover, it is difficult to view that the Deceased’s physical harm caused by psychological disorder, such as suicide, could cause suicide or depression. Although the Deceased’s physical harm caused by an accident during his/her performance of his/her duties, it is difficult to view that there was no likelihood that he/she could have suffered a considerable causal relation between the Deceased’s physical harm and mental disorder, such as suicide, and that there was no likelihood that he/she could have suffered a considerable causal relation between his/her mental disorder or depression.

Therefore, the Defendant’s disposition that deemed that the death of the deceased does not constitute an occupational accident is unlawful.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case shall be accepted for the reasons, and the judgment of the court of first instance is unfair for the conclusion, and it is so decided as per Disposition to cancel the disposition of this case and cancel it.

The presiding judge, assistant judge and assistant judge

Judge Park Jong-soo

Judges Lee Hyun-woo