(영문) 광주고등법원 2006.5.12. 선고 2006누308 판결

The following facts are not disputed between the parties, or can be acknowledged in full view of Gap evidence 1-1-3 and Eul evidence 1-1 and the whole purport of arguments.

A. On July 18, 2001, the Plaintiff’s husband, B (hereinafter “the deceased,”) was working as a Cmiddle School teacher under the Jeju Provincial Office of Education, and committed suicide on the ground of the Plaintiff’s home-based D Apartment-gu, Nam-gu, Gwangju District Office of Education, which is the deceased’s house on September 24, 2001.

B. On July 15, 2003, the plaintiff filed an application for registration of bereaved family members of a person who has rendered distinguished service to the State on the ground that the deceased constitutes a public official who died on duty in accordance with Article 4 (1) 11 of the Act on the Honorable Treatment of and Support for Persons of Distinguished Service to the State (hereinafter referred to as the "Act"). However, on September 19, 2003, the defendant made a decision on the eligibility of bereaved family members of a person who has rendered distinguished service to the State (hereinafter referred to as the "disposition of this case") on the ground that "the deceased's death is a person's death by self-injury, and is contrary to the basic ideology of the enactment purpose and honorable treatment of the Act" (hereinafter referred to as "disposition

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. Summary of the parties' assertion

The plaintiff is the cause of the claim of this case. The deceased caused the outbreak, aggravation, and aggravation of depression due to mental stress that occurred in the course of performing official duties as a teacher, and eventually caused suicide. As such, suicide of the deceased was caused by the symptoms of mental disorder, and the suicide of the deceased was caused by a considerable decline in normal perception, ability to choose action, or mental suppression, and thus constitutes death in the line of official duties, and thus constitutes "the death caused by self-injury" as prescribed by the Act, because it was not based on the normal and free will of the deceased, and thus, the disposition of this case is unlawful. The defendant asserts that the death of the deceased constitutes a self-injury as a self-injury as prescribed by Article 4 (5) 4 of the Act, and the disposition of this case is justifiable.

(b) Related statutes;

It is as shown in the attached Form.

C. Determination

(1) “Death due to self-injury” under Article 4(5)4 of the Act refers to death according to free from a literal interpretation. The Act and its Enforcement Decree are substantial compensation corresponding to the degree of their contribution and sacrifice in order to promote their livelihood stability and welfare by giving honorable treatment to persons who have rendered distinguished services to the State and their bereaved family members. The purpose of this provision is to strictly list persons who have rendered distinguished services to the State in accordance with the purpose, basic ideology, and compensation system, and to stipulate that the death due to self-injury does not constitute persons who have rendered distinguished services to the State. Thus, in light of the purport of this provision, it cannot be deemed that a public official’s death according to free will solely on the ground that a public official’s physical and free will was caused by his physical motive or important cause, and whether the suicide was based on normal and free will in the status of a person who has mental capacity should be determined by comprehensively taking into account the age, character and position of the persons who have rendered distinguished services to the State and their bereaved family members, the period and time of suicide and other surrounding mental pressure of the person.

(2) Therefore, as alleged by the plaintiff, as to whether the deceased’s death deviates from normal and free will, the deceased’s 17 through 15, 24, 27, 29, 31, out of Gap’s 16-1, 23-1, 30-3, and the fact that the deceased’s death had been reported to the above 20-year school physician at the time of the above 10-year school, and the deceased’s death had been reported to the above 10-year school physician at the time of the above 20-year school, and the deceased’s death had been reported to the above 10-year school physician at the time of the above 20-year school physician’s death, the deceased’s death had been reported to the above 10-year school physician’s death, and the head of the above 2-year school physician’s school physician’s school inspector’s death had been reported to the above 10-year school inspector’s new school inspector’s health care work.

Rather, according to the above adopted evidence and the results of fact-finding on the head of the Jeonnam University Hospital, the deceased was a teacher who had been promoted 27 years of experience as well as his school principal, but was living at his house as originally diagnosed, and was commuting to his school for the first time from July 2001 to September 2001, and the head of the school was in an open school relationship with his school principal during the first time from September 2001 to September 201, the deceased was in charge of normal treatment of the deceased's work without any special defect in addition to sporadic pain and 20 years of suicide immediately before and after his suicide. In addition, in the research project that was treated as one of the main causes of 0-year suicide, such as his family ability, the deceased's first removal of the deceased's school principal and 20-year-old school principal's removal of the deceased's symptoms and 20-year-old school principal's removal of the deceased's school principal, as well as the first removal of 2-year-old school principal.

It is reasonable to view that the depression of the deceased was caused not only by excessive interference with the principal of the school or by other improper behavior, but also by some personal stress on the part of the deceased's long-term research task entrusted for promotion. Among the arguments, the inappropriate behavior of the principal of the school at issue may be an unfair act in the course of performing his duties, it is difficult to conclude that the work volume of the deceased was an unlawful act to the extent that it falls under a reason for punishment or removal from personnel affairs, in light of the size of the school at which the deceased was employed and the behavior of the deceased, it is difficult to readily conclude that it was excessive to the extent that it was impossible to reduce the work burden of the principal, even if considering the increase in the career burden of the principal of the school at which the deceased had been on duty, and that it was a relatively difficult to conclude that it was an excessive change in the career experience and ability of the principal of the school at which the deceased had been on duty, as a whole, due to the lack of personal experience and experience, and the degree of harm to the principal of the school at least 27 years.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the deceased's death constitutes death due to self-injury as stipulated in Article 4 (5) 4 of the Act. Thus, the defendant's disposition of this case decided that the plaintiff is legitimate and the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed without merit. The judgment of the court of first instance is so unfair that this conclusion is different, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the court of first instance.