logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2021.01.28 2019구합14914
유족급여및장의비부지급처분취소
Text

The plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The deceased C (D life, hereinafter “the deceased”) is a person registered as a business operator with the trade name “E”, and the plaintiffs are the parents of the deceased.

B. On August 1, 2018, F’s representative G entered into a business agency contract with H Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “the contractor”) for the construction of F factories on the first and third parcels of land in Yangju-si (hereinafter “instant construction contract”). At that time, J and K were designated as the field manager.

(c)

On November 28, 2018, at the construction site of this case around 08:40, the deceased, who was listed on the roof of the warehouse building of 6 meters high at the site of this case, was released from the panel by hand to remove a well-known panel, felled into the floor, and transferred to L hospital, but died on the 11:10 multiple trauma on the same day.

(d)

The Plaintiffs asserted that “the Deceased was employed as a person who executes a panel in relation to the construction site of this case and provided labor during the occurrence of an accident,” and filed a claim with the Defendant for the payment of survivors’ benefits and funeral expenses. On August 5, 2019, the Defendant rendered a decision on the site pay for survivors’ benefits and funeral expenses (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that “The Deceased is determined as a subcontractor who entered into a subcontract agreement rather than an employee employed at the construction site of this case as a result of examining the characteristics of the Deceased’s workers.”

[Reasons for Recognition] In the absence of dispute, Gap 1, 2, 5 evidence, Eul 1 to 4, and Eul 7 evidence, each of the whole arguments, and the purport of the whole arguments

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiffs asserted that the deceased had his personal work at the request of the field manager at the construction site of this case, and that the deceased took part in the construction site, that the deceased did not have a drawing on the establishment of the panel, and that the deceased received from the construction site.

arrow