-NHRCK presented an opinion to the Supreme Court, saying that the case is subject to medical care benefits under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act.
o The NHRCK(Chairperson, Hyun Byung-chul) welcomes the Supreme Court’s ruling which says that the damage of an artificial leg of an employee with disabilities during work has to be recognized as an industrial accident and the employee should receive compensation for the damage.
o On 18 February, 2014, pursuant to Article 28.1 of the National Human Rights Commission Act, the NHRCK presented an opinion related to the revocation litigation on disapproval of medical benefits(a litigation asking for cancellation of the Korea Worker’s Compensation and Welfare Service’s disapproval on request for medical care benefits), saying that when an artificial leg of an employee who depends on it for work is destroyed during work, it is subject to medical care benefits under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act.
o The NHRCK said in its opinion that the ruling of the lower courts which only considered lexical meaning of an artificial leg and decided that the damage of plaintiff's artificial leg was not subject to medical care benefits is discrimination against persons with disabilities without reasonable grounds, and that it could further result in discouraging employees with disabilities who want to engage in social activities through labor.
o On 10, July, the Supreme Court(the third court, Min Il-yeong(Chief Judge), Lee Inbok, Park Bo-yeong, Kim Sin) decided to reverse and remand the ruling of the lower courts where the plaintiff lost the revocation litigation filed against the Korea Workers’ Compensation and Welfare Service on its disapproval on request for medical benefits. The plaintiff’s artificial leg was damaged while clearing snow during his work as an apartment security guard.
o The lower courts ruled against him, saying that his artificial leg cannot be seen as part of his body, and the damage of artificial leg does not fall within the category of damage which can receive medical care benefits.
o However, in line with the opinion expressed by the NHRCK, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, saying that when an employee’s artificial leg which not only assists employee’s body but also replaces employee’s leg functionally, physically and practically is destroyed during work, it is subject to medical care benefits under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act.
o The NHRCK welcomes the decision of the Supreme Court and hopes for an environment where more employees with disabilities can actively engage in work.
