TL;DR
Court: “Even daily workers are workers if they are dependent on the workplace.”
Survivor’s family wins lawsuit against Corporation to cancel unfair profit collection decision
The court confirmed that even ‘daily workers’ workers are considered ‘workers’ under the Labor Standards Act if they worked under the company’s management and supervision. The idea is that if there was a dependent relationship with the workplace, employee status should be recognized.
According to the legal community on the 17th, the 13th Administrative Division of the Seoul Administrative Court (Chief Judge Park Jeong-dae) ruled in favor of the plaintiff in a lawsuit filed by the bereaved family of Mr. A, who recently died, against the Korea Workers’ Compensation and Welfare Service to cancel the decision to collect unfair profits.
Mr. A fell to his death when a rope broke while performing exterior window cleaning work for a company in June 2021. This work was contracted by the company to a maintenance company, and Mr. A was a daily worker who received daily wages from the maintenance company.
The Korea Workers’ Compensation and Welfare Service paid the bereaved family benefits and funeral expenses requested by the bereaved family in August, two months after the accident, but in March of last year, “As a result of a reinvestigation by the Ministry of Employment and Labor, it was determined that the deceased did not qualify as an employee under the Labor Standards Act,” and paid the bereaved family benefits and funeral expenses. It was decided to collect unfair profits worth 162 million won, claiming that it was paid incorrectly.
Accordingly, the bereaved family filed an administrative lawsuit, claiming that Mr. A was an employee under the Labor Standards Act. At the same time, he argued that it is illegal to collect already paid survivor benefits as unfair profits.
The court that heard the case ruled in favor of the bereaved family.
The court explained, “It is recognized that the deceased was a person who provided labor for wages in a dependent relationship with the company,” and “he is a worker subject to the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act.”
In addition, he added, “When the deceased came down from the rooftop at the scene of the incident to work, the company is responsible for taking risk prevention measures by installing and managing the safety or protection facilities required to be installed when working on high floors.”
The court ruled to cancel the Corporation’s decision to collect unfair profits, saying, “The deceased, who provided labor according to the company’s instructions in an area controlled by the company as an employer, is an employee subject to industrial accident insurance.”
※CBS Nocut News changes the world together with your reports. Please tell us all the stories, including various corruption, unfair treatment, incidents and funny stories.
- email : [email protected]
- kakaotalk : @Nocut News
- Site: https://url.kr/b71afn
Copyright © CBS Nocut News. Reproduction and redistribution prohibited.
The categories of this article follow the classification of media outlets.
The category an article belongs to is classified by the media company.
News organizations can classify an article into two or more categories.
