[Plaintiff, Appellee]
[Defendant, Appellant] Geumsan-gun Medical Insurance Cooperative (Litigation representative Dongyang General Law Firm, attorneys Kim Seong-gi and 2 others)
[Judgment Below] Daejeon High Court Judgment 1996. 2. 8., Case No. 95Na4542
[Order]
The appeal is dismissed. The costs of the appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
[Reasoning]
The grounds of appeal are examined.
1. As to Ground No. 1
Where an employee who serves as a full-time officer for labor union affairs is relieved of the duties originally to be performed under the labor contract and instead engages full-time in labor union affairs, and this arrangement was made with the consent of the employer company, and the employee held the status of an employee at the time the disaster occurred, and the illness in question arose from physical and mental overwork in the course of performing labor union duties, then, absent special circumstances, this should be regarded as an occupational accident subject to accident compensation under the Labor Standards Act (근로기준법). However, disasters arising from activities related to labor organizations at a higher level or in a federated relationship that are unrelated, by the nature of the duties, to the employer's business, or from unlawful labor union activities, or from labor union activities occurring after entering a dispute stage in which the union is in an adversarial relationship with the employer, cannot be regarded as occupational accidents (see this Court's Decision 92Nu14502, delivered on 1994. 2. 22.).
According to the facts found by the court below, the Defendant Cooperative is a workplace to which the Labor Standards Act applies, and the deceased non-party, pursuant to the Defendant Cooperative's order of dispatch based on the collective agreement, served full-time solely in the affairs of the labor union of the Chungnam Regional Medical Insurance Cooperative. The deceased continued to receive the same treatment from the Defendant Cooperative as before, and the mental and physical overwork arising from the deceased's excessive performance of duties as a full-time union officer compounded with, and thereby induced or aggravated, the principal cause of the illness that led to the deceased's death. Accordingly, the deceased's death constitutes an occupational death as prescribed in Articles 82 and 83 of the Labor Standards Act.
The judgment of the court below, which is to the same effect, is correct, and there is no illegality therein, such as a misapprehension of the legal principles concerning the requirements for liability for occupational accident compensation, as argued in the grounds of appeal. This ground is without merit.
2. As to Ground No. 2
Even upon examining the details of the deceased's overwork as found by the court below, it is clear that such overwork resulted from the performance of labor union duties. Therefore, the Defendant's argument that the deceased's death falls under the grounds for exclusion from occupational accidents as discussed above cannot be accepted.
Furthermore, the precedents of this Court cited by the Defendant concern facts different from those of the present case and are not suitable to be invoked here. This ground is also without merit.
3. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of the appeal are to be borne by the losing Defendant. The Justices involved unanimously agree, and it is so ordered as stated in the Order.
Justice Kim Hyeong-seon (Presiding Justice)
Park Man-ho (Justice in charge)
Park Jun-seo
Lee Yong-hun