(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.9.25. 선고 2019누44028 판결

A. On November 26, 2011, when the Plaintiff’s husband was working as a member of the financial team of C (hereinafter referred to as “the Plaintiff’s husband”), the Plaintiff was going out of a mountain-do forest of mountain-do around 13:00 on November 26, 201, and then, at around 08:30 on the following day, the Plaintiff was found to have committed suicide by hanging trees using a mountain-ro plate installed on trees in the Dominsan-dong, Dominsan mountain-si (hereinafter referred to as “the instant disaster”).

B. The Plaintiff asserted that the deceased’s death constitutes an occupational accident, and filed a claim for the payment of survivors’ benefits and funeral expenses with the Defendant. However, on April 22, 2015, the Defendant rendered a disposition of survivors’ benefits and funeral funeral expenses (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that “it is difficult to deem that the deceased committed suicide in a state of mental disorder due to lack of reasonable grounds to deem that the deceased was in a state of mental disorder caused by his/her loss of self-determination.”

C. The Plaintiff appealed and filed a request for review with the Public Official Pension Benefit Review Committee, but was dismissed on August 27, 2015 by the Public Official Pension Benefit Review Committee.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 6, and purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The Deceased was committed by the Board of Audit and Inspection with heavy stress on the case of “unfair payment of D-related value-added tax amount” which was conducted by the Board of Audit and Inspection against C. Accordingly, the Deceased was committed due to the occurrence of a suicide due to the occurrence of a serious mental disorder whose normal perception, capacity to choose an act, or ability to restrain mentally and physically. As a proximate causal relationship exists between the Deceased’s death and his work, the deceased’s death constitutes occupational accident and thus

B. Relevant legislation

It is as shown in the attached Form.

1) The Deceased’s work experience and the deceased were employed on October 2, 1991 to work for about 20 years and 20 months from the date of the occurrence of the instant accident. At the time of the instant accident, the Plaintiff was in charge of taxes and funding as the head of the fiscal team at the time of the instant accident.

2) The deceased’s attitude and character of normal work

The Deceased was awarded official commendation six times by the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Mayor and the C president while working in C, and there was no disciplinary action during the period of service.

The Deceased was brightness and displeasure, and was fluent with Easts.

(iii)the inspection of C by the Board of Audit and Inspection and its progress;

A) From January 12, 2010 to February 18, 2011, the Board of Audit and Inspection conducted an audit of â€˜the actual conditions of management improvement of the EE public enterprise' for â€˜A' for â€˜A. In the process, C did not apply the value-added tax rate for D installation and paid the construction cost including value-added tax to F. However, it found the fact that C would not be refunded value-added tax for about KRW 1.72 billion due to F’s discontinuance of business.

B) The Board of Audit and Inspection conducted an additional investigation on the deceased and other relevant personnel in relation to the foregoing â€˜unfair payment of value-added tax amount related to D installation' case, and conducted an investigation on the deceased two times from April 201 to June 201.

C) As a result, on November 16, 201, the Board of Audit and Inspection sent to C a written demand for reprimand to the effect that he/she would be subject to suspension from office against the deceased and three other employees, who are relevant employees, and C issued a copy of the written request for reprimand to the deceased on November 25, 201.

D) While the Deceased requested a new review on the decision of reprimand by the Board of Audit and Inspection, the Deceased’s request for a new review was met to the effect that “only the request for reprimand by the Board of Audit and Inspection was made at the C Auditor’s office and there was no claim for the right to indemnity, and thus, there was no need for a new review.”

E) After the request for reprimand by the Board of Audit and Inspection, three persons, other than the Deceased, were subject to a disciplinary action for one month of suspension from office on February 1, 2012, and thereafter, the said three months was reduced by both the self-presidential committee’s reduction of salary.

F) On January 6, 2012, C filed a lawsuit claiming damages against relevant employees on the basis of the Seoul citizen auditor’s ex officio audit and inspection request as to the outstanding penalty for delay due to the extension of the time limit for completion of the J establishment project.

(iv)the reaction and health conditions, etc. of the Deceased in connection with the inspection by the Board of Audit and Inspection.

A) Until there was an audit by the Board of Audit and Inspection, the Deceased did not have been suffering from mental therapy due to symptoms such as anxiety and depression.

B) On November 18, 201, the deceased came to know of the audit results by the Board of Audit and Inspection on November 18, 201, and started smoking again. The deceased, even in the office, did not have a good locked, and did not have a proper meal. The deceased left the office, but did not have a degree of two weeks, and did not have a variety of tobacco, and he was responsible for the Defendant himself. The deceased continued to repeat the phrase “The deceased’s staff members k of the same kind of tobacco who did not report to the head of the headquarters on the day, and who treated and desire all of the companies to commit a crime. The same is the same as “I want to treat the company as a criminal.” The head of the knife’s distance was satly satly satly satly and hickly satly.”

C) The Deceased was aware that there was a higher expectation for promotion than the motive, and that it would be omitted from promotion due to disciplinary action, and that it was uneasy due to the possibility of exercising C’s right to demand reimbursement of approximately KRW 1.724 billion of the amount of loss. On November 21, 2011, the Deceased stated that “I am flick.......... are having exercised the right to demand reimbursement.” The Deceased, when exercising the right to demand reimbursement, is the end of the life.”

D) On November 25, 2011, the Deceased sent a copy of the written demand for reprimand by the Board of Audit and Inspection from C, and then sent the spouse the words “I am sphere in the world. I am sphere in the world. I am spherely sphere? I am sphere in the eye? I am sphere’s secret number every day. I am sphere and sphere sphere sphere sphere sphere sphere sphere sphere sphere sphere sphere sphere sphere sphere sphere sphere sphere spheres

E) On November 26, 2011, the Deceased moved to a minor tea at around 11:00, and changed to a house and changed to a mountain trails at around 13:00 and did not enter the house at night and thereafter did not enter the house at night. On the following day, the Deceased was found to commit suicide using a mountain street from 08:30 on the day to 08:30.

5) Medical opinions

A) N opinion by a medical specialist in the department of mental health in M Hospital ( February 28, 2014)

In light of the background of the accident, family members, statements of teroman, etc., it is likely that the disaster of the deceased was caused by depression related to work stress (non-professional field, time pressure, excessive work, etc.).

B) zero opinions from medical specialists ( July 7, 2015)

If the psychological burden on the shock action and the right to indemnity had not been anticipated, it is deemed that the acute stress was likely to have occurred. In such a case, symptoms may have been sufficiently revealed, such as anxiety, early and tension, depression, mental physical exercise delay, suicide impulse, and water surface disorder. In resolving the practical problem, it may be presumed that the person attempted suicide could have satisfyed with his/her own ability. If the person attempted to commit suicide, it is difficult to think that the person was able to lead an asset life as a suicide while there was no depression in this case.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 6, Gap evidence 7, Gap evidence 11 through 17, Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 2 and the purport of whole pleadings

D. Determination

1) Relevant legal principles

The term “occupational accident” under Article 4 subparag. 1 of the former Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act (amended by Act No. 8373 of Apr. 11, 2007) refers to an occupational 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, there should be a causal relationship between his/her duties and accident, and the causal relationship should be proved by the assertion of such causal relationship. The existence of such causal relationship should not be necessarily proved by medical and natural science, but by the existence of proximate causal relationship from a normative point of view. As such, the occurrence or aggravation of a disease occurs due to the occupational or mental disorder or the stress overlaps with the main cause of the disease, and it can be presumed that there was a proximate causal causal relationship between his/her duties and death, based on the circumstance of an occupational disorder or mental disorder, or the ability to select a person with severe mental disorder, and the reason and death of an employee who was affected by his/her own mental pressure, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2000Da3979, etc.).

2) Specific determination

In light of the above facts and the circumstances acknowledged by the aforementioned evidence, it is reasonable to view that the deceased was caused to commit suicide due to the occurrence of a serious occupational stress, due to the depression caused by extreme occupational stress. As such, a proximate causal relationship between the deceased’s work and the death may be acknowledged.

A) As the Board of Audit and Inspection demanded reprimand against the deceased after investigating the deceased, it seems that the deceased was subject to disciplinary action at his discretion, and there is a high possibility of omission in promotion. In addition, it seems that the deceased was under serious stress in mind that he would be subject to the claim for reimbursement from the non-party company.

B) In light of the statements, actions, etc. of the deceased after the suicide, it can be seen that he had continuously experienced extreme anxiety and depression due to such stress, and the person immediately before the suicide can be deemed that the depression has rapidly deteriorated due to the mental instability, such as leading to abnormal behavior, etc.

C) In addition, in light of the fact that the deceased did not leave a material to his family members or their neighbors before suicide, and the deceased flaps installed for the convenience of visitors, and committed suicide by hanging trees, the deceased’s suicide appears to have been done contingent in a state of mental disorder caused by depression.

D) The Deceased’s brightness and displeasure, and maintained a smooth relationship with the foregoing, and there was no record of treatment due to the symptoms such as depression before the Board of Audit and Inspection’s audit. Therefore, it is difficult to view that the Deceased’s symptoms have reached the above symptoms due to reasons other than duties.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case shall be accepted with due reasons, and since the judgment of the court of first instance is unfair with different conclusions, the plaintiff's appeal is accepted and the judgment of the court of first instance is revoked and the plaintiff's claim is accepted as per Disposition.