[Plaintiff, Appellee] Plaintiff
[Defendant, Appellant] Head of the Uijeongbu Office, Ministry of Labor
[Judgment Below] Seoul High Court Decision 87Gu1390 rendered on March 24, 1988
[Order]
The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court.
[Reasoning]
The grounds of appeal are examined.
According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below found, as facts not disputed between the parties, that the non-party, the son of the Plaintiff, while working as an injection molding worker at the factory of the non-party Dongjin Plastics Co., Ltd. (동진플라스틱주식회사), collapsed while performing injection molding work at the injection work station at approximately 12:00 on May 4, 1987, and died while being transported to the hospital, and that the precise cause of death of the deceased was not established. Based on these findings, the court below held that where it is clear that an employee's death occurred in the course of performing his duties, but the cause of death is not clear, it is reasonable to presume that the death was caused by the employee's duties unless there is rebutting evidence establishing suicide or some other cause, and therefore that the Defendant's decision to deny payment of the Plaintiff's claim for bereaved family benefits and funeral expenses, on the ground that there was no evidence that the death, even though it occurred in the course of performing his duties, was caused by his duties, was unlawful. Accordingly, the court below granted the Plaintiff's claim.
However, in order for a death to be recognized as a work-related death under Article 82 of the Labor Standards Act (근로기준법) and Article 3 of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act (산업재해보상보험법), it is not only necessary that the death occurred in the course of performing one's duties, but also that the death was caused by such duties, such that there exists a proximate causal relationship between the duties and the injury or death. In such a case, the burden of proving the causal relationship between the employee's duties and the injury or death lies with the party asserting it. Therefore, even if an employee's death occurred in the course of performing his duties, if the cause of death is not clear, it cannot be presumed that the death was caused by his duties (see this Court's Decisions 83Daka1670 rendered on August 19, 1986, and 88Nu10947 rendered on July 25, 1989).
The court below, having taken the opposite view and held that the Defendant's decision to deny payment in this case was unlawful, committed an error of misapprehending the legal principles concerning work-related death as prescribed by the aforementioned statutes. Therefore, the argument pointing out this error is well-founded.
Accordingly, the judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the court below, this judgment being rendered as stated in the Order by the unanimous opinion of the participating Justices.
Justices Bae Seok (Presiding Justice), Lee Hoe-chang, Kim Sang-won, Kim Ju-han