logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2014.10.16 2014누40441
유족보상금부지급결정 취소
Text

1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The Defendant’s disposition of paying bereaved family’s compensation against the Plaintiff on May 20, 2013.

Reasons

From June 30, 2010 to June 30, 2010, the deceased B (hereinafter referred to as "the deceased"), who is the husband of the Plaintiff, worked as police officials (rank: Inspector) at the publicity office of the National Police Agency.

On January 28, 2013, the Deceased attended a meeting held by K, a public relations officer, with E, who works in online small statistics of the public relations office, and was unable to take a job while drinking alcohol at a singing store. On the following day, at around 21:20, the Deceased was found to have hiddenly damaged the two sides (the bones of head, brain side, dives of the bones, etc.) from among the number of points 200 meters away from the 200 meters away from the Han River of the Han River from the Han River of the Mapo-gu, the public relations officer.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). On March 18, 2013, the Plaintiff filed a claim for bereaved family’s compensation for the instant accident on March 18, 2013, but the Defendant had the same damage.

5. 20. The Plaintiff’s attending 20. 20. rejected the payment because it was not an extension of official duties, but a private group.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition”). [The grounds for recognition] did not dispute, each entry in Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 through 5, 12, and Eul’s evidence Nos. 1 (including each number), and the purport of the entire argument as to the legitimacy of the instant disposition, the plaintiff’s assertion is legitimate, and the deceased participated in a meeting in accordance with F’s direction, which is a superior of the department to which he belongs, prior to personnel movement and has lost his way in the state where he lost his ability to make judgment due to excessive drinking, and thus, the instant accident constitutes death on official duties under Article 61(1) of the Public Officials Pension Act and Article 13 subparag. 1 of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act.

Therefore, the instant disposition should be revoked as it is unlawful on a different premise.

Article 61 of the Public Officials Pension Act (Survivor’s Compensation and Survivors’ Compensation for Public Officials who were on duty) (1) Where a public official dies on official duty while in office, or dies of a disease or injury resulting from official duty or within three years after his/her retirement, the bereaved family shall be paid compensation for survivors.

(2) Survivors' compensation under paragraph (1) shall be paid.

arrow