logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1970. 11. 24. 선고 70다2144 판결
[보상금][집18(3)민,321]
Main Issues

The purpose of Article 11(2) of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act (Relation to Claim for Insurance Benefits under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act and Claim for Accident Compensation under the Labor Standards Act).

Summary of Judgment

In a case where a worker dies on duty, his/her bereaved family members may choose the right to claim compensation for survivors under the Labor Standards Act and the right to claim compensation for survivors under the Act. Therefore, in a case where the bereaved family has claimed compensation for survivors under Article 82 of the Labor Standards Act against the employer without exercising the right to claim compensation for survivors, if the employer asserts and proves that the right to claim compensation for survivors under the Act has occurred in detail, the employer may not be exempted from the obligation to pay compensation for survivors under Article 82 of the Labor Standards Act.

[Reference Provisions]

Article 11(2) of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act, Article 82 of the Labor Standards Act, Article 87 of the Labor Standards Act

Plaintiff-Appellee

Plaintiff

Defendant-Appellant

Korea Electric Power Corporation

Judgment of the lower court

Seoul High Court Decision 70Na161 decided September 2, 1970, Seoul High Court Decision 70Na161 decided September 2, 1970

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

Reasons

We examine the Defendant’s agent’s grounds of appeal.

According to the provisions of Article 11(2) of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act, the insured shall be exempted from the liability for accident compensation under the Labor Standards Act within the limit of insurance benefits under this Act. The purport of this provision is as follows. In other words, in the event that an employee dies on duty, the bereaved family members have the right to claim the compensation for survivors (Article 82 of the Labor Standards Act) against the employer, and on the other hand, there are the right to claim the insurance benefits under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act, and

If the bereaved family has claimed compensation for survivors under Article 82 of the Labor Standards Act against the employer without exercising the right to claim insurance benefits, it is reasonable to view that the employer cannot be exempted from the obligation to pay bereaved family's compensation under Article 82 of the Labor Standards Act, unless it is aware of the existence of the right to claim insurance benefits under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act in detail. However, in this case, the Defendant cannot be deemed to have asserted and proved that the Defendant, the employer, did not have made any assertion and proof as to the fact of the occurrence of specific right to claim benefits under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act, and the Defendant cannot be exempted from the liability to pay bereaved family's compensation under Article 82 of the Labor Standards Act. The original judgment that can be seen to have been held to this purport is justifiable, and there is no unlawful cause for the application of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act or the Labor Standards

Therefore, this appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the participating judges.

The presiding judge of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge)

arrow
본문참조조문
기타문서