The case holding that "Death caused by a disease in official duty" under Article 61 (1) of the Public Officials Pension Act shall be deemed as "Death caused by a disease in official duty" in the case where he/she died of the heart as a result of a c

"Death caused by a disease caused by an official duty" as stipulated in Article 61 (1) of the Public Officials Pension Act refers to the case of death of a disease caused by an official duty during the performance of official duty. Therefore, there should be causation between the disease caused by the official duty and the disease caused by the death. However, if the main cause of the disease overlaps with the main cause of the disease even though it is not directly related to the official duty and the disease caused the disease or aggravated the disease, it should be deemed that the causal relationship exists. Furthermore, the disease caused by an excessive performance shall also include the basic disease that can be ordinarily performed at ordinary times or the existing disease which rapidly aggravated rapidly due to the excessive performance of his/her duty. As a result, the public official's continuous performance of excessive duties led to the direct opportunity of the occurrence of the death, which led to the death of the deceased and the public official's death.

Article 61 (1) of the Public Officials Pension Act

[Defendant-Appellee] Jeonyang et al., Counsel for defendant-appellee

Public Official Pension Corporation

Seoul High Court Decision 88Gu6094 delivered on December 19, 1989

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

"Death caused by a disease in the line of duty" as stipulated in Article 61 (1) of the Public Officials Pension Act refers to the case of death of a disease caused by such disease during the performance of official duties by a public official. Therefore, there is a causal relationship between the disease caused by the death in the line of duty and the disease caused by the death in the line of duty. However, even if the main cause of the disease is not directly related to official duties, if the disease is caused or aggravated as a result of the overlap with the main cause of the disease in the line of duty, it should be deemed that there is a causal relationship. Furthermore, the disease caused by an excess shall also be deemed to include a basic disease that can be ordinarily worked in the school or an existing disease which becomes worse rapidly due to the excessive performance of duties (see Supreme Court Decision 87Nu625, Dec. 8, 1987; Supreme Court Decision 87Nu81, Feb. 23, 1988

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below affirmed the judgment of the court below that there were no errors in the misapprehension of the law as alleged in the above facts, such as the death of the deceased or the public duty of the above 6th of the first time at the time of appointment as the head of the Dong, while the deceased Kim Yong-ran was working as the head of the Cho Jong-si in the Jeonju-si on August 5, 1987, after drinking alcohol and returning drinking, after drinking alcohol, and died of the so-called so-called so-called so-called so-called so-called so-called the so-called "so-called 's death' and the so-called 's death'. However, while performing the duties of the head of Dong who was first appointed as the head of the Dong, there were concerns about the 's 's death' and the so-called 's severe 's death' and the above 's death', and there was no such errors in the misapprehension of the law as argued in the records.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kim Sang-won (Presiding Justice) Lee Jong-won (Presiding Justice)