logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.07.24 2018누77977
요양승인처분취소
Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. The total cost of the lawsuit is due to the participation.

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff was entrusted by C (hereinafter “C”) with the installation, maintenance and repair (A/S (hereinafter “D services”) and the business, etc. of D goods.

The intervenor performed the plaintiff's D Service in some areas of the Leecheon-si of Gyeonggi-do.

On June 19, 2017, the intervenor felled on the antenna location change work on the roof of D customer's house, and received the diagnosis of the "salvination on the outer side of the atmosphere" and applied for medical care benefits to the Defendant.

On August 4, 2017, the Defendant rendered an intervenor a disposition not to grant medical care on the ground that the intervenor does not constitute a worker under the Labor Standards Act. On February 20, 2018, the Defendant received the Intervenor’s request for review and revoked the non-approval of medical care on the ground that the intervenor constitutes a worker under the Labor Standards Act, and issued a disposition not to grant medical care (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Reasons for Recognition] No dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 and 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the intervenor applied for the district in which he applied for the service and provided the service autonomously to the customer, provided the customer with the equipment set at his own discretion, and received the business fees for new subscription.

The intervenor himself/herself prepared the vehicle necessary for performing his/her duties and borne the maintenance cost of the vehicle, such as oil supply, and he/she directly purchased and used various equipment, such as measuring instruments and materials.

The plaintiff provided incentives according to customer satisfaction or imposed personal rewards to intervenors in line with D's business policies.

Therefore, the intervenor is an individual entrepreneur who is commissioned or subcontracted to the Plaintiff with the work of new installation, transfer, maintenance and repair, etc. of DNA products, and is not an employee of the plaintiff.

Therefore, the instant disposition is rendered.

arrow