MOEL Interpretation

Labor Standards Act

Compensation for Occupational Accidents


  •  
     Search
9 Records
9.In the case of an injured worker who has been receiving workers’ compensation treatment for over 10 years due to a diagnosis of synovitis in the left knee joint, can the employer dismiss the worker after providing lump-sum compensation under Article 87 of the Labor Standards Act [currently Article 84] on the grounds that continued employment is no longer possible?
8.According to Article 47 of the Enforcement Decree of the Labor Standards Act [currently Article 51] (Timing of Compensation), disability compensation should be provided after full recovery from a worker’s injury or illness. However, if disability compensation was paid based on a claim submitted by the worker or their family (along with a disability diagnosis) and the disability grade was determined by the head of a general hospital, is the employer still required to pay additional medical expenses for treatment received after the disability compensation was paid? Also, Article 87 of the Labor Standards Act [currently Article 84] (Lump-Sum Compensation) states that if a worker’s injury or illness remains uncured even after two years from the commencement of treatment, the employer may pay a lump sum equal to 1,340 days’ worth of the average wage to be released from all further compensation obligations under the Act. In this case, can compensation for medical treatment be limited to March 29, 2002 (given that the accident occurred on March 30, 2000)? Furthermore, if a lump-sum payment is made under Article 87, must previously paid disability compensation be recovered?
7.In a public work project workplace not covered by industrial accident insurance, a worker was injured on September 14, 1999, and has since been receiving medical and leave compensation. It is said that after two years, Article 87 of the Labor Standards Act [currently Article 84] can be applied. If the case is closed with lump-sum compensation, what are the criteria and supporting documents for the decision? The initial injury was a left clavicle fracture treated surgically with complete union, but since then, the worker has suffered from left shoulder adhesive capsulitis, reflex sympathetic dystrophy (suspected), and a delayed union of the left clavicle fracture. The worker is still undergoing long-term treatment. Is it possible to fully close the case by applying lump-sum compensation under Article 87 of the Labor Standards Act [currently Article 84]? Also, what are the standards for assessing sequelae and complications?
6.For a worker undergoing long-term treatment due to an occupational injury, when making a lump-sum compensation payment under Article 87 of the Labor Standards Act [currently Article 84] to be relieved of all responsibilities under the Labor Standards Act, what is the meaning of ‘two years after the commencement of treatment’ for lump-sum compensation?
5.A sanitation worker employed by a district office in ○○ City was injured during work and has been receiving medical treatment since February 14, 2005. The worker is currently receiving a disability compensation pension under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act. If the employer dismisses the worker without providing a separate lump-sum compensation, would this violate the Labor Standards Act? Dismissal without lump-sum compensation is allowed. Article 23(2) of the Labor Standards Act prohibits dismissal during the worker’s leave for medical treatment due to a work-related injury and for 30 days thereafter. However, the proviso provides an exception allowing dismissal if a lump-sum compensation has been paid under Article 84 of the same Act. Article 52(4) of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act states that if a worker who is receiving medical care begins receiving a disability compensation pension after three years from the start of treatment, when applying the proviso of Article 23(2) of the Labor Standards Act, the employer is deemed to have made the lump-sum compensation under Article 84 of the Labor Standards Act after the three-year period. Therefore, dismissal without a separate lump-sum payment is permitted. Dismissal is permitted only after the lump-sum compensation has been paid. Article 23(2) of the Labor Standards Act prohibits dismissal during the period of leave for medical treatment and 30 days after. It allows dismissal only if the lump-sum compensation has been paid under Article 84 of the same Act. Article 84 stipulates that if a worker injured at work is not fully recovered after two years from the start of treatment, the employer must pay a lump-sum compensation equivalent to 1,340 days of average wages, thereby exempting the employer from all further compensation responsibilities. Therefore, dismissal can only occur after such lump-sum payment.
4.Article 90 of the Labor Standards Act does not include any penalty provisions. In such cases, is it possible to criminally prosecute the primary contractor? If the primary contractor can be criminally punished despite the absence of penalty provisions for violations of Article 90 of the Labor Standards Act, can the subcontractor who has assumed accident compensation responsibility under the subcontract also be criminally prosecuted?
3.What does the phrase “money equivalent to compensation under this Act according to the Civil Code or other laws” in Article 87 of the Labor Standards Act mean? Is the employer obligated to separately compensate for medical treatment costs that are not covered by workers’ compensation insurance (non-reimbursable parts)?
2.If an injury occurs due to a commuting accident as defined under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act (hereinafter referred to as the “Industrial Accident Insurance Act”), but the injury is healed with treatment within 3 days and thus no medical benefits are paid under the Industrial Accident Insurance Act, can the worker receive medical treatment compensation from the employer under the Labor Standards Act?
1.If an occupational disease that occurred at a previous workplace recurs at the current workplace, does the current workplace have compensation responsibility under the Labor Standards Act?
<<  <  1  >  >>


For further questions, please
call (+82) 2-539-0098 or email bongsoo@k-labor.com