(1) In addition, the location and degree of proof of the burden of proving the causal relationship between official duties and the occurrence of the disease in the “public official disease,” which is the requirement for the payment of bereaved family’s compensation as prescribed by Article 61(1) of the former Public Officials Pension Act / Whether there is a proximate causal relationship between official duties and death (affirmative with qualification) and matters to be considered to recognize a proximate causal

(2) The case holding that, in case where a fire officer Gap, who was appointed to a fire school and assigned to a full-time professor in the field of fire while performing an excessive duty that requires overtime hours and overtime hours, was transferred to a full-time professor in the field of fire, and where Byung again committed suicide during the first time after attempted suicide with the burden of taking care of the teaching staff, the case held that a proximate causal relation between Gap's duties and death can be acknowledged on the grounds that the excessive duties and stress related thereto caused the depression of Gap, and further aggravated due to the burden of his duties, and that Gap's normal perception, ability to choose behavior, and mental suppression capacity can be presumed to have been faced to the extent that he could not expect reasonable judgment due to depression, and thus, a proximate causal relation can be acknowledged between Gap's duties and death.

Article 61(1) of the former Public Officials Pension Act (Amended by Act No. 13387, Jun. 22, 2015) (2) (Article 61(1) of the former Public Officials Pension Act (Amended by Act No. 13387, Jun. 22, 2015)

[1] Supreme Court Decision 2011Du32898 Decided June 11, 2015 (Gong2015Ha, 983)

Plaintiff (Law Firm Professor, Attorneys Job Offer-ho et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

The Government Employees Pension Service

Seoul High Court Decision 2016Nu72497 decided April 14, 2017

The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. “A disease in the line of duty” under Article 61(1) of the former Public Officials Pension Act (amended by Act No. 13387, Jun. 22, 2015) refers to a disease caused by official duty during the performance of official duties. As such, there is a causal relationship between a public official’s and a disease. The causal relationship must be proved by the assertion of such causal relationship. Provided, That where a proximate causal relationship is acknowledged from a normative point of view, the causal relationship is not necessarily required to be proved in medical and natural science. In the event a public official’s death due to a suicide, the disease is caused or aggravated due to the occurrence or aggravation of the disease in the line of duty, and it can be inferred that the disease was caused by lack of normal perception or choice ability, mental suppression, or considerable decline, and that there is a proximate causal relationship between official duties and the death in the line of duty. In addition, there is a comprehensive consideration of the following factors: (i) the degree of proximate causal relationship between the person’s physical and mental illness, and (ii) the person’s mental condition of suicide.

2. Review of the reasoning of the lower judgment and the evidence duly admitted by the lower court reveals the following facts.

A. On November 11, 1994, the deceased non-party (hereinafter “the deceased non-party”) who is the husband of the Plaintiff was appointed as the local fire assistant, and the ○○○○○-do Fire School (hereinafter “instant fire assistant”) mainly started to work as a guard at the △△ fire assistant, and returned to the life counselor of the instant fire school on July 4, 2014, one year after he was transferred to the △△ fire assistant.

B. Three life counselors serve a week (09:00 to 18:00), night (18:00 to the following day), holiday (09:00 to the following day), holiday (09:00 to the following day), and holiday (09:00 to the following day), and holiday (sever). The Deceased, as a living counselor, was engaged in a special duty type of service for the elderly and children in the region, in addition to the lectures and draft of the subject in charge as a living counselor, preparation of training programs, guidance for trainees, living patrols, and supply of daily necessities. From July 2014 to December 2014, the Deceased’s average working hours during six months are 58 hours, and the holiday working hours are 25 hours.

C. The Deceased stated that, during the preparation for education, the deceased has a decent and decent nature, such as having all air conditioning devices for education at the latest time, and that, the deceased stated that “the deceased’s fee is strong enough to observe the sense of responsibility and duties of the deceased, the left work is sufficient, and the deceased’s fee is not easily refused at the request of others.”

D. On January 19, 2015, the Deceased was transferred to a full-time professor in the field of fire at the instant fire-fighting school. The duties in charge are ① the development of teaching ability and teaching techniques (the acquisition of new knowledge and teaching skills for the subject in charge), ② the field practice and fire practice education, ③ the duties related to the National Fire-Fighting School Research Promotion (the preparation of a lecture, the publication of teaching materials for lectures, the provision of related materials, etc.), ④ the duties of writing teaching materials and teaching materials for the subject in charge, etc. among them, the number of hours for fire practice exceeds the theoretical and class classes because repeated and learning are required. The instant fire-fighting school increased the course of new education for only one time in the year 2014 and allocated 540 hours to the Deceased for 2015.

E. Accordingly, on January 21, 2015, the Deceased expressed that he had a sense of bearing the burden following the running of a school as a professor rather than a school teacher, and on January 21, 2015, the transfer molded that “B is no longer capable of withstanding the limit up to the summer.” On the following day, the Deceased attempted suicide from his car to a person who attempted suicide with a shot as a shot, and was found and attempted to commit an attempted act.

F. Afterwards, the Deceased was suffering from sick leave until February 10, 2015 (name 1 omitted), (name 2 omitted), and was subject to depression counseling treatment and medication. At the time of counseling treatment, the Deceased complained that “I want to die because I wanting to retire from the company due to excessive work quantity, and because I would like to have it difficult to adapt to new work after personnel movement,” and that return to the school will be borne by the Deceased. Ultimately, the Deceased committed suicide at his own home around 12:05 on February 14, 2015, by selling a title to the sports organization.

G. On the other hand, the deceased did not have any record of mental therapy due to depression before the suicide attempt and did not have any particular family problem or health problem.

3. We examine these facts in light of the legal principles as seen earlier.

The deceased seems to have a strong sense of responsibility and left to the normal sense of responsibility. On July 4, 2014, the deceased appears to have been subject to considerable stress due to the following excessive work hours and excessive work that requires overtime work while leaving the instant fire-fighting school. In particular, it can be inferred that the time of the demotion transferred to the full-time professor in the field of fire and allocated are rapidly increased, and that the time of the demotion transferred to the full-time professor in the field of fire has undergone serious mental distress due to the burden.

In light of the fact that the deceased attempted suicide immediately after being transferred to former professor, stress and burden burden on work may be deemed to have reached the degree that it would no longer be able to check, and accordingly, depression, which has been born in full-time, may be deemed to have been aggravated due to pressure on returning to work, notwithstanding counseling and drug treatment.

In full view of these circumstances, it is reasonable to view that the depression of the deceased was caused due to excessive work and severe stress related thereto, and such depression was worse due to the burden of the deceased’s work.

In addition, taking into account the background leading up to the suicide again during the first suicide attempted by the deceased, and the situation where the deceased could not find out any other special circumstances that led to the suicide, it can be inferred that the deceased's normal perception, ability to choose action, and mental suppression are considerably deteriorated due to depression, and that the deceased's work and death could not be expected to make reasonable judgment. Thus, proximate causal relation can be acknowledged between the deceased's death and the deceased's death.

4. Nevertheless, the lower court did not closely examine the cause and degree of occupational stress that the deceased received, the developments leading up to and deepening the depression of the deceased, and the mental condition of the deceased at the time of suicide, etc., and determined that it is difficult to deem that the deceased was subject to, or was unable to overcome, occupational stress to the extent that the deceased was significantly able to suffer, or that the depression was caused and aggravated, and denied the proximate causal relationship between the deceased’s death and his official duties. Therefore, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on proximate causal relationship between the death and the official duty in a occupational accident, thereby failing to exhaust all necessary deliberation, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. The

5. Therefore, the lower judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Ko Young-han (Presiding Justice)