logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2016.03.18 2015구단19841
간병급여 부당이득금(배액)징수결정처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On June 4, 199, the Plaintiff received medical care due to occupational accidents, and completed the medical care on April 16, 2003, and received class 1 of the disability grade. From April 30, 2010 to July 3, 2010, and from February 18, 2013 to March 8, 2013, the Plaintiff received additional medical care and received class 1 of the disability grade.

B. On March 7, 2013, the Plaintiff, on behalf of the Plaintiff, filed a claim for nursing benefits with the Defendant on behalf of the Plaintiff, stating in the written claim for nursing benefits that “the Plaintiff was under B’s nursing care at Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Eunpyeong-gu C home from March 8, 2010 to March 7, 2013.” Accordingly, the Defendant paid 24,937,040 won of nursing benefits for three years corresponding to the said period to the Plaintiff on April 1, 2013.

C. On March 24, 2015, the Defendant rendered a decision to collect 26,764,500 won of the nursing benefits paid for the above accommodation period as unjust enrichment (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff was admitted to the Jinju Prison and the Gyeongbuk Branch First Prison, etc. for 20 days from July 22, 2011 to August 10, 201 and 505 days from September 30, 201 to February 15, 2013 and did not receive nursing benefits for the said accommodation period, on the ground that the Plaintiff was paid nursing benefits for the said accommodation period (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

The Plaintiff filed a request for review to the Defendant on June 2014, but was dismissed on August 2015, and the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Reexamination Committee filed a request for reexamination, but was dismissed on August 20, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 1 to 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. Although the Plaintiff notified the person in charge at the time of claiming nursing benefits of the Plaintiff’s assertion that he/she was admitted to a prison, the person in charge is urged to claim nursing benefits for three years and accordingly, he/she did not claim nursing benefits in a false or unjust manner.

Nevertheless, the instant disposition based on a different premise is unlawful.

(b) Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act;

arrow