206Nu31596 Revocation of Disposition of Non-approval for Medical Treatment for Official Duties

○ ○

Incheon

Attorney Han-chul et al.

Public Official Pension Corporation

Gangnam-gu Seoul Central District Court 701

Representative Chairperson of the Board of Directors

Litigation Performers Choi-hee

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2006Gudan5673 decided Nov. 23, 2006

August 24, 2007

October 5, 2007

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. On March 27, 2006, the Defendant’s disposition revoking the Plaintiff’s non-approval of medical care for official duties.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.

The order is as set forth in the text.

1. Details of the disposition;

The court's explanation in this part is the same as the statement in the corresponding column of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is citing it in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

On December 15, 2005, the plaintiff was sustained the injury of this case due to a traffic accident that occurred at 23:58 on the same day while he gets home to a normal out of the country after he saw 22:18 on the same day while he saw his business without making a show of money, and went home to a normal outing route, he saw 23:58 on the same day. Thus, the injury of this case constitutes an injury on official duty.

B. Recognizing the facts (1) The Plaintiff was appointed as a public official on November 26, 1997, and worked as a head of the office of Incheon Postal Office 3: from August 22, 2005 to the office of the head of the office, the Plaintiff sent out and retired from the office using Pyeongtaek Baba. (2) From the 15th of each month to the 20th of each month, there were many mail items to be delivered, such as the notice, and the number of members of the office of the Incheon Postal Office 3: the number of members of the office of the Plaintiff, including the Plaintiff, was increased by the end of the 12th of each year, and the number of members of the 3rd of the office of the Plaintiff, including the Plaintiff, was included in the 3rd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 3th of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the office.

[Grounds for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 7 and 8, testimony of the first instance court and the first instance court and the party's trial witness and the purport of the whole pleadings

C. Determination

(1) Article 14 of the Enforcement Rule of the Public Officials Pension Act (the injury, death, etc. caused by an accident in the course of departure or retirement) provides that “In the event a public official is injured or died due to a traffic accident, fall accident or fall accident that occurs in the forest, or in the course of leaving the forest by normal route and method, or any other accident, it shall be deemed as an injury or death in the course of performing his/her official duties.” In order for the public official to perform his/her duties, a disaster that occurred during his/her departure or discharge in the course of his/her residence and work place in a timely manner and manner, falls under a disaster that occurs in the course of performing his/her official duties under the Public Officials Pension Act, but it shall not be deemed that the public official is off his/her usual route and method, or that his/her deviation is a minimum act to return to the rational route of departure (see Supreme Court Decision 198 November 1, 1998).

24. See Supreme Court Decision 97Nu16121 Decided 24.

(2) In light of the fact that the reason that the plaintiff was about to start from the post office after his leaving the post is excessive, and that he was about to start with his own food, and that he was about to start with 22:00, if he was to work more than 22:00, he can be viewed as a process ordinarily accompanying the excessive service. If most of the team members including the plaintiff completed his overtime service as the proposal of the team leader, if most of the team members including the plaintiff agreed to do so, it is reasonable to regard him as a process accompanying the excessive service. The meal place is a place that is not far away from the post office, and the main purpose such as the time of his stay is not about 1 hour, but about 1 hour, it can not be deemed that the plaintiff had been converted to the private sphere of his official duty after his early leaving the post office.

(3) Therefore, it cannot be deemed that the Plaintiff’s retirement process exceeded the net course and method, or that his deviation goes beyond the minimum act to return to a reasonable retirement route. Thus, the instant traffic accident constitutes an accident on the part of the Plaintiff.

3. Conclusion

If so, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable, and the judgment of the court of first instance is unfair with different conclusions. Thus, the plaintiff's appeal is accepted and the judgment of the court of first instance is revoked and the plaintiff's claim is accepted. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Justices Kim Jong-sik

Judge Lee Jae-soo

Judges Lee Dong-soo