[Plaintiff, Appellant] Plaintiff
[Defendant, Appellee] Korea Workers' Compensation & Welfare Service
[Judgment Below] Daejeon High Court Decision 99Nu1227 delivered on June 23, 2000
[Order]
The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Daejeon High Court.
[Reasoning]
The grounds of appeal are examined.
Under Article 4, Item 1, Article 38, Paragraph 1, Item 3, and Article 42, Paragraphs 1 and 2 of the former Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act (Sanjaeoje Bosang Bohum-beop) (before amendment by Act No. 6100 of December 31, 1999), a worker who has suffered a disability due to an occupational accident is to receive, as disability benefits under industrial accident compensation insurance, either a disability compensation pension or a disability compensation lump-sum payment in accordance with the standards for disability grades prescribed by Presidential Decree, and, except in cases where a pension is paid to a worker with a disability grade corresponding to complete loss of working capacity as prescribed by Presidential Decree, the beneficiary is entitled to choose between the pension and the lump-sum payment. In addition, under the first sentence of Article 48, Paragraph 2, and the main text of Paragraph 3, of the same Act, a beneficiary of insurance benefits under this Act may not receive, in duplication for the same cause, both insurance benefits under this Act and damages under the Civil Act (Minbeop) or other statutes from the insured employer.
Furthermore, as a means of avoiding such duplicate payment where a worker is receiving a disability compensation pension, the latter part of Article 48, Paragraph 2 of the Act provides that where a person receiving a disability compensation pension receives damages under the Civil Act or other statutes, such person shall be deemed to have received a disability compensation lump-sum payment, and the amount equivalent to such lump-sum payment shall be deducted from the damages. Correspondingly, the proviso to Paragraph 3 of the same Article provides that, where the amount equivalent to the disability compensation lump-sum payment has been deducted in the calculation of damages for a pension beneficiary in this manner, the portion of the pension corresponding to that lump-sum amount shall nonetheless be paid.
Considering the purport of these provisions—in particular, the fact that the distinction between the disability compensation pension and the lump-sum payment is merely a difference in the method of payment of disability benefits; that, except in special cases, the choice between the pension and the lump-sum payment depends on the beneficiary's own intention; and that, in the case of a pension beneficiary, the amount equivalent to the lump-sum payment is to be deducted from the damages—it is reasonable to conclude that, under the former Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act, the disability compensation pension and the disability compensation lump-sum payment are of equal value as a whole. Accordingly, where, in calculating damages under the Civil Act or other statutes for the same cause with respect to a disability compensation pension beneficiary, an amount equivalent to the lump-sum payment has been deducted, this should be regarded as equivalent to a deduction of an amount corresponding to the entire pension; and it is only when the entire amount of the disability compensation pension as insurance benefit under this Act is paid that this accords with the purport of the prohibition on duplicate payment as discussed above. It is proper to construe the proviso to Article 48, Paragraph 3 of the Act as merely restating, for clarification, this purport in correspondence with the latter part of Paragraph 2 of the same Article.
According to the reasoning of the judgment below and of the first-instance judgment cited therein, the court below determined as follows: where a beneficiary who suffered an occupational accident and was receiving a disability compensation pension received damages with the amount equivalent to the lump-sum payment deducted therefrom, the amount of disability compensation pension corresponding to the disability compensation lump-sum payment that the disability compensation pension beneficiary is deemed to have received under the proviso to Article 48, Paragraph 3 of the Act (this amount being the pension amount for the period converted, into a pension period, from the number of days corresponding to the disability compensation lump-sum payment deducted upon receipt of damages in the civil action) shall be paid; and that, as for the period of disability compensation pension corresponding to the portion of the damages equivalent to lost income, received after deduction of the amount equivalent to the disability compensation lump-sum payment, the right to claim the pension is extinguished pursuant to the main text of the same paragraph. However, this determination by the court below is erroneous in that it misapprehends the legal principles concerning the prohibition on duplicate payment of insurance benefits and damages, and the nature of the disability compensation pension, as discussed above, and it is clear that this error affected the judgment. The part of the grounds of appeal pointing this out is well-founded.
Therefore, the judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the court below for further hearing and determination, this Decision being rendered by the unanimous opinion of the participating Justices, as set forth in the Order.
Justice Lee Kyu-hong (Presiding Justice), Song Jin-hoon (Justice in charge), Yoon Jae-sik, Son Ji-yeol