Cases where the Seafarers' Act is deemed to fall under the "Death while on duty" under Article 98 of the Seafarers' Act.

The so-called "Death in the performance of duties" under Article 98 of the Seafarers Act includes cases where the disease caused the death was aggravated due to the aggravation of duties, and the death was rapidly caused by the death of the deceased. However, the death of the body that caused the death of the deceased was the same as the cancer, and thus, it is difficult to know the cause of the death in modern medicine, and it is possible to seek a life upon early detection and recovery. However, even if it is difficult to find at the beginning and even if it is not possible to claim a life even after the operation was performed, it can be extended. If the work environment at the time of the deceased returned to the base as the deep-sea fishing ground, considerable time and expenses are necessary if it was returned to the base, and there was a decrease in the weight of 20 tons until the death of the fishing vessel due to the lack of the number of persons, but at the first 10-day continuous performance of duties, and caused the death of the deceased rapidly, which constitutes "the death in the performance of duties".

Article 98 of the Seafarers Act

Supreme Court Decision 69Da732 delivered on August 26, 1969 (Kakadd 741, Supreme Court Decision 17 third citizen's 41, Decision 98 (1) 1863, Decision 709 delivered on September 29, 1970 (Supreme Court Decision 91Da1409 delivered on September 29, 1970) (No. 9171, Decision 18 third citizen's 113 and Decision 98 (2) 1863, Decision 1963)

Plaintiff

Defendant corporation

Busan District Court (67Ga4091)

Supreme Court Decision 69Da732 Decided August 26, 1969

The appeal is dismissed.

All the costs of the lawsuit after the appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff the amount of 308,197 won and the amount at the rate of 5 percent per annum from March 15, 1966 to the full payment day.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the defendant.

A provisional execution may be carried out only under paragraph (1).

The same shall apply to the order.

The deceased was the wife of the deceased non-party 1, who was employed by the plaintiff as the crew of No. 5, a deep-sea fishing vessel belonging to the defendant company, and was engaged in fishing operations by going to the Pago Pago Gama (Pgo Gama) fishing ground, and died at the hospital on March 24, 1966, there is no dispute between the parties, and the evidence No. 1,12,13,16-14-1-6-2 of the evidence No. 17 evidence No. 17-3 which can be recognized as the authenticity by the testimony of the non-party 2. The deceased's testimony of the non-party 3, a deep-sea fishing vessel belonging to the defendant company, and the deceased's 1-6-month 1-6-month 1-6-month 1-6-month 2-day 1-day 6-day 3-day 3-day 1-day 6-day 3-day 1-day 6-day 1-day 2-day 1-day 1-day 1-day -day 2-day.

However, the plaintiff asserts that the death of the non-party above constitutes death in the course of performing duties pursuant to Article 98 of the Seafarers Act. Thus, the so-called occupational death under the above Article includes not only the death due to the direct duties, but also the death rapid as a result of aggravation of the deceased's performance of duties. However, considering the evidence accepted by the above members and the other evidences, the non-party 2-1's appraisal result of the appraiser non-party 5 of the trial court and the whole purport of the parties' arguments in the testimony, considering the whole contents of the parties' arguments, it cannot be known as the cause of the death of the deceased non-party 1 as modern medicine because it is the malicious species such as cancer, and it is difficult to find the death at the beginning, but also it is difficult to find the death by the non-party 1 as a result of the above 1's early death, and it cannot be acknowledged that the non-party 1's early death was caused by the non-party 1's act of death and the non-party 1's act of death.

Thus, the deceased non-party 1's death constitutes the so-called occupational death under Article 98 of the Seafarers' Act. Thus, the plaintiff's wife can claim the first priority bereaved family's allowance pursuant to Article 57 of the Seafarers' Act. The fact that the monthly standard remuneration of the deceased non-party 1 is 8,500 won, and there is no dispute between the parties. Thus, the 36-month remuneration under the same Act is 306,000 won, and the defendant is obligated to pay it to the plaintiff.

As above, the original judgment to the same effect is reasonable, and the defendant's appeal is without merit, it is dismissed in accordance with Article 384 of the Civil Procedure Act, and the bearing of the total cost of the lawsuit after filing the appeal is decided as per Disposition by Articles 89 and 96 of the same Act.

Judges Saples (Presiding Judge)