Open Decision Ledger · Constitutional, administrative & state liability
Relief allowance for re-graded pneumoconiosis in closed coal mines
Supreme Court, Nov. 13, 2025, 2022Du50694 (judgment)
Case name: 재해위로금지급청구의소
Official text on the National Law Information Center
Question
Where a miner with pneumoconiosis from a mine that later closed had already received a relief allowance on an earlier disability grade, was he still a person whose grade was not fixed at the closure date under Article 41(4)(v) of the Enforcement Decree of the former Coal Industry Act, and how is the further allowance calculated?
Holding
Yes. That category under Article 41(4)(v) of the Enforcement Decree of the former Coal Industry Act includes a worker who finished his first treatment, was graded, received the matching allowance, and then needed re-treatment after closure, and one graded after 21 November 2010 who receives a pneumoconiosis pension rather than a disability benefit; the difference between the allowance for the new grade and the one for the first grade must be added. Where the corporation paid only a sum calculated on the former grade, absent special circumstances that is a partial satisfaction of the allowance for the raised grade, so it owes the balance and Article 58(3)(ii) of the Enforcement Decree of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act is not applied by analogy. Where a worker who received less than the allowance for the raised grade worsens again and is re-graded, that article is applied by analogy to the final grade and the earlier shortfall must also be settled.
Summary of the holding, verbatim
그러나 이와 달리 진폐근로자가 종전의 장해등급에 해당하는 재해위로금을 지급받지 못한 상태에서 장해상태가 악화되어 장해등급이 변경되었음에도, 한국광해광업공단이 변경된 장해등급이 아니라 종전의 장해등급에 해당하는 장해보상일시금 상당의 재해위로금만을 지급하였다면, 특별한 사정이 없는 한 이는 변경된 장해등급에 해당하는 재해위로금에 대한 일부 변제로서의 성격을 가진다고 보는 것이 타당하다.
Unofficial English translation
However, contrary to the foregoing, where a worker with pneumoconiosis, without having received the disaster consolation payment corresponding to the previous disability grade, suffered a worsening of his/her disability state and the disability grade was changed, and yet the Korea Mine Rehabilitation and Mineral Resources Corporation paid only a disaster consolation payment in an amount equivalent to the disability compensation lump-sum payment corresponding to the previous disability grade rather than the changed disability grade, then, absent special circumstances, it is reasonable to regard this as having the character of a partial payment of the disaster consolation payment corresponding to the changed disability grade.
Disposition
Reversed and rendered by the Supreme Court Stated in the decision
피고 패소 부분을 파기하고, 그에 해당하는 원고들의 청구를 각 기각한다.
Unofficial English translation
The portion of the judgment adverse to the defendant is reversed, and the corresponding claims of the plaintiffs are each dismissed.
Form of the test
Elements stated Stated in the decision
그가 지급받을 재해위로금액은 산재보험법 시행령 제58조 제3항 제2호를 유추적용하여 ‘변경된 장해등급에 해당하는 장해보상일시금의 지급일수에서 종전의 장해등급에 해당하는 장해보상일시금의 지급일수를 뺀 일수에 평균임금을 곱한 금액’으로 산정하는 것이 타당하다.
Unofficial English translation
The amount of the disaster consolation payment to be received by him/her is reasonably calculated, by applying mutatis mutandis Article 58 (3) 2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act, as 'an amount calculated by multiplying the average wage by the number of days obtained by subtracting the number of days of payment of the disability compensation lump-sum payment corresponding to the previous disability grade from the number of days of payment of the disability compensation lump-sum payment corresponding to the changed disability grade.'
Factors
- 재해위로금이 사회보장적인 차원에서 통상적인 재해보상금에 추가하여 지급되는 위로금의 성격을 갖는다는 점과 진폐증의 특성 등을 고려하면
- 재요양을 받게 된 피재근로자도 포함되며, 이 경우 재요양 후의 새로운 장해등급에 따른 재해위로금에서 최초 장해등급에 따른 재해위로금을 뺀 차액을 추가로 지급해야 한다
- 산업재해보상보험법의 시행일인 2010. 11. 21. 이후에 장해등급이 확정되어 장해급여(장해보상연금 또는 장해보상일시금)가 아닌 진폐보상연금을 받게 되었더라도 구 석탄산업법 시행령(2000. 12. 29. 대통령령 제17055호로 개정되기 전의 것) 제41조 제4항 제5호에 따른 재해위로금 지급 대상에 해당한다
- 특별한 사정이 없는 한 이는 변경된 장해등급에 해당하는 재해위로금에 대한 일부 변제로서의 성격을 가진다고 보는 것이 타당하다
Unofficial English translation
• Considering that the disaster consolation payment has the character of a consolation payment paid, from the perspective of social security, in addition to ordinary industrial accident compensation, and the characteristics of pneumoconiosis, etc.
• injured workers who came to receive further medical treatment are also included, and in such a case the difference obtained by subtracting the disaster consolation payment based on the initial disability grade from the disaster consolation payment based on the new disability grade after the further medical treatment must be additionally paid
• Even if the disability grade was determined after November 21, 2010, the effective date of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act, and the person consequently came to receive a pneumoconiosis compensation pension instead of disability benefits (disability compensation pension or disability compensation lump-sum payment), the person falls within the scope of persons eligible for the disaster consolation payment under Article 41 (4) 5 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Coal Industry Act (as in force before its amendment by Presidential Decree No. 17055 on December 29, 2000)
• absent special circumstances, it is reasonable to regard this as having the character of a partial payment of the disaster consolation payment corresponding to the changed disability grade
Relation to precedent
Follows earlier decisions Stated in the decision
대법원 1999. 1. 26. 선고 98두12598 판결(공1999상, 381), 대법원 2020. 10. 15. 선고 2019두60523 판결(공2020하, 2183)
Unofficial English translation
Supreme Court Decision 98Du12598 decided January 26, 1999 (Gong 1999 Sang, 381), Supreme Court Decision 2019Du60523 decided October 15, 2020 (Gong 2020 Ha, 2183)
Decisions referred to
[1][2] 대법원 1999. 1. 26. 선고 98두12598 판결(공1999상, 381), 대법원 2020. 10. 15. 선고 2019두60523 판결(공2020하, 2183) / [3] 대법원 2025. 11. 6. 선고 2022두67272 판결
Burden of proof
Not addressed Not in the decision
Open question and revisit condition
What special circumstances take a payment calculated on the former disability grade out of the partial-satisfaction treatment, so that Article 58(3)(ii) of the Enforcement Decree of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act is applied by analogy instead?
A later decision specifying those special circumstances, or an amendment to Article 41(4)(v) of the Enforcement Decree of the Coal Industry Act or to Article 58(3)(ii) of the Enforcement Decree of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act, would require this entry to be read again.
Cross-family AI independent reading & axis check
8 of 8 axes matched GPT-6 Astra (OpenAI, codex CLI) · 2026-10-24
A reader from another model family (GPT-6 Astra), given the official text but not the primary reading, agreed on all 8 axes.
Raw responses and comparison record: Protocol · Blind readings (JSONL) · Axis comparison (JSONL) · SHA-256 (JSON)
Lower-court contrast & scope of application
Lower-court reading vs. Supreme Court holding
Lower-court context: The Seoul High Court, in its judgment of 24 June 2022 (2021Nu42285), held that both plaintiffs were persons whose grade was not fixed at the closure date, so they were covered, and that receiving a pneumoconiosis pension made no difference. On the amount it ordered, for each plaintiff, the days for grade 3 less the days for grade 11, multiplied by the average wage, plus the days for grade 11 multiplied by the average wage at the earlier payment, less that earlier allowance.
Supreme Court standard: The Supreme Court found no error on entitlement. On the amount it held the court below had misread the method: because the earlier allowance was, absent special circumstances, a partial satisfaction of the allowance for the grade then current, the days for grade 11 must not be deducted from the days for grade 3. It set the correct sums itself, KRW 109,994,646 for Plaintiff 1 and KRW 166,283,621 for Plaintiff 2, reversed the parts ordering payment beyond those sums under Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 437 of the Civil Procedure Act, dismissed those claims and dismissed the rest of the appeal.
Distinguishing conditions
- A case where special circumstances show that the sum calculated on the former grade was not paid as a partial satisfaction of the allowance for the raised grade.
- A miner whose industrial accident fell outside the period from one year before the date set by the Minister of Commerce, Industry and Energy through the closure date, or whose mine is outside the criteria for a closure-support mine.
- A relief allowance governed by the Coal Industry Act as amended by Act No. 17919 of 9 March 2021, since the decision applied the earlier version of the Act and its Enforcement Decree.
Record verification notes
Set the file against three points: the injury date and the closure date, to confirm the look-back period; every allowance actually paid, with its grade and average wage, since the partial-satisfaction treatment holds only absent special circumstances; and the whole sequence of later grades and average wages. The Court refused a challenge to the closure date as an attack on the trial court's discretion over evidence.
From the official text
Points at issue
[1] 구 석탄산업법 시행령 제41조 제4항 제5호의 ‘재해발생기간에 불구하고 폐광일 현재 장해등급이 확정되지 아니한 자’에 최초의 요양을 종결하고 그에 따른 신체장해등급 판정을 받고 그에 상응하는 재해위로금을 받았다가 폐광일 이후 해당 상병이 재발하거나 해당 상병에 기인한 합병증이 발생하여 재요양을 받게 된 피재근로자가 포함되는지 여부(적극) 및 이 경우 지급해야 하는 재해위로금액 [2] 폐광된 광산에서 진폐로 인한 업무상 재해를 입은 근로자가 2010. 5. 20. 법률 제10305호로 개정된 산업재해보상보험법 시행일인 2010. 11. 21. 이후에 장해등급이 확정되어 장해급여가 아닌 진폐보상연금을 받게 된 경우, 구 석탄산업법 시행령 제41조 제4항 제5호에 따른 재해위로금 지급 대상에 해당하는지 여부(적극) [3] 폐광된 광산에서 진폐로 인한 업무상 재해를 입은 사람이 종전 장해등급에 해당하는 구 석탄산업법상 재해위로금을 지급받은 후 장해상태가 악화되어 장해등급이 변경되었을 경우, 진폐근로자가 지급받을 재해위로금액 산정 방법 / 진폐근로자가 종전의 장해등급에 해당하는 재해위로금을 지급받지 못한 상태에서 장해상태가 악화되어 장해등급이 변경되었음에도, 한국광해광업공단이 변경된 장해등급이 아니라 종전의 장해등급에 해당하는 장해보상일시금 상당의 재해위로금만을 지급한 경우, 한국광해광업공단이 지급해야 할 재해위로금액의 산정 방법 및 이 경우 산업재해보상보험법 시행령 제58조 제3항 제2호를 유추적용하여 변경된 장해등급에 따라 지급할 재해위로금을 산정해야 하는지 여부(소극) / 진폐근로자가 한국광해광업공단으로부터 변경된 장해등급에 해당하는 재해위로금액에 미치지 못하는 금액의 재해위로금만을 지급받은 상태에서 재차 장해상태가 악화되어 장해등급이 변경된 경우, 재해위로금 산정 방법
Unofficial English translation
[1] Whether 'a person whose disability grade has not been determined as of the mine closure date notwithstanding the period in which the industrial accident occurred' in Article 41 (4) 5 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Coal Industry Act includes an injured worker who completed the initial medical treatment, received a determination of a physical disability grade therefor, and received a corresponding disaster consolation payment, but who, after the mine closure date, suffered a recurrence of the relevant disease or developed complications arising from the relevant disease and consequently came to receive further medical treatment (affirmative), and the amount of the disaster consolation payment to be paid in such a case [2] Whether, where a worker who suffered an industrial accident caused by pneumoconiosis at a closed mine had his/her disability grade determined after November 21, 2010, the effective date of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act as amended by Act No. 10305 on May 20, 2010, and consequently came to receive a pneumoconiosis compensation pension instead of disability benefits, the worker falls within the scope of persons eligible for the disaster consolation payment under Article 41 (4) 5 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Coal Industry Act (affirmative) [3] The method of calculating the amount of the disaster consolation payment to be received by a worker with pneumoconiosis where a person who suffered an industrial accident caused by pneumoconiosis at a closed mine received the disaster consolation payment under the former Coal Industry Act corresponding to the previous disability grade and thereafter his/her disability state worsened and the disability grade was changed / The method of calculating the amount of the disaster consolation payment to be paid by the Korea Mine Rehabilitation and Mineral Resources Corporation where, although the disability state of a worker with pneumoconiosis worsened and the disability grade was changed without the worker having received the disaster consolation payment corresponding to the previous disability grade, the Korea Mine Rehabilitation and Mineral Resources Corporation paid only a disaster consolation payment in an amount equivalent to the disability compensation lump-sum payment corresponding to the previous disability grade rather than the changed disability grade, and whether, in such a case, the disaster consolation payment to be paid must be calculated in accordance with the changed disability grade by applying mutatis mutandis Article 58 (3) 2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act (negative) / The method of calculating the disaster consolation payment where, while a worker with pneumoconiosis had received from the Korea Mine Rehabilitation and Mineral Resources Corporation only a disaster consolation payment in an amount less than the amount of the disaster consolation payment corresponding to the changed disability grade, his/her disability state worsened again and the disability grade was changed
Summary of the holding
[1] 구 석탄산업법 시행령(2000. 12. 29. 대통령령 제17055호로 개정되기 전의 것) 제41조 제4항 제5호에 따른 재해위로금이 사회보장적인 차원에서 통상적인 재해보상금에 추가하여 지급되는 위로금의 성격을 갖는다는 점과 진폐증의 특성 등을 고려하면, 위 조항의 ‘재해발생기간에 불구하고 폐광일 현재 장해등급이 확정되지 아니한 자’에는 일단 최초의 요양을 종결하고 그에 따른 신체장해등급 판정을 받고 그에 상응하는 재해위로금을 받았다가 폐광일 이후 해당 상병이 재발하거나 해당 상병에 기인한 합병증이 발생하여 재요양을 받게 된 피재근로자도 포함되며, 이 경우 재요양 후의 새로운 장해등급에 따른 재해위로금에서 최초 장해등급에 따른 재해위로금을 뺀 차액을 추가로 지급해야 한다. [2] 폐광된 광산에서 진폐로 인한 업무상 재해를 입은 근로자가 2010. 5. 20. 법률 제10305호로 개정된 산업재해보상보험법의 시행일인 2010. 11. 21. 이후에 장해등급이 확정되어 장해급여(장해보상연금 또는 장해보상일시금)가 아닌 진폐보상연금을 받게 되었더라도 구 석탄산업법 시행령(2000. 12. 29. 대통령령 제17055호로 개정되기 전의 것) 제41조 제4항 제5호에 따른 재해위로금 지급 대상에 해당한다. [3] 구 석탄산업법 시행령(2000. 12. 29. 대통령령 제17055호로 개정되기 전의 것) 제41조 제4항 제5호 후문, 산업재해보상보험법 제51조 제1항, 제60조 제2항, 산업재해보상보험법 시행령(이하 ‘산재보험법 시행령’이라 한다) 제58조 제3항 제2호의 내용과 체계에 산재보험법 시행령 제58조 제3항 제2호의 취지를 종합하면, 폐광된 광산에서 진폐로 인한 업무상 재해를 입은 사람(이하 ‘진폐근로자’라 한다)이 종전 장해등급에 해당하는 구 석탄산업법(2021. 3. 9. 법률 제17919호로 개정되기 전의 것)상 재해위로금을 지급받은 후 장해상태가 악화되어 장해등급이 변경되었을 경우, 그가 지급받을 재해위로금액은 산재보험법 시행령 제58조 제3항 제2호를 유추적용하여 ‘변경된 장해등급에 해당하는 장해보상일시금의 지급일수에서 종전의 장해등급에 해당하는 장해보상일시금의 지급일수를 뺀 일수에 평균임금을 곱한 금액’으로 산정하는 것이 타당하다. 그러나 이와 달리 진폐근로자가 종전의 장해등급에 해당하는 재해위로금을 지급받지 못한 상태에서 장해상태가 악화되어 장해등급이 변경되었음에도, 한국광해광업공단이 변경된 장해등급이 아니라 종전의 장해등급에 해당하는 장해보상일시금 상당의 재해위로금만을 지급하였다면, 특별한 사정이 없는 한 이는 변경된 장해등급에 해당하는 재해위로금에 대한 일부 변제로서의 성격을 가진다고 보는 것이 타당하다. 이러한 경우 한국광해광업공단으로서는 진폐근로자에게 변경된 장해등급에 해당하는 재해위로금액에서 실제 지급한 금원의 금액을 뺀 나머지를 지급할 의무가 있고, 이와 달리 이러한 경우에까지 산재보험법 시행령 제58조 제3항 제2호를 유추적용하여 변경된 장해등급에 따라 지급할 재해위로금을 산정할 것은 아니다. 다만 위와 같이 진폐근로자가 한국광해광업공단으로부터 변경된 장해등급에 해당하는 재해위로금액에 미치지 못하는 금액의 재해위로금만을 지급받은 상태에서 재차 장해상태가 악화되어 장해등급이 변경되었다면, 한국광해광업공단으로서는 산재보험법 시행령 제58조 제3항 제2호를 유추적용하여 산정한 최종 변경된 장해등급에 해당하는 재해위로금과 위 기지급 재해위로금 지급 당시 진폐근로자가 진단받은 장해등급에 해당하는 재해위로금의 차액을 지급하고, 이에 더하여 기존에 지급된 재해위로금의 과소 산정에 대한 정산으로서 변경된 장해등급에 해당하는 재해위로금액과 기지급 재해위로금액의 차액을 지급할 의무가 있다.
Order
1. 원심판결 중 원고 1에게 109,994,646원 및 그중 89,289,009원에 대하여 2020. 5. 29.부터, 20,705,637원에 대하여 2020. 11. 6.부터 각 2022. 6. 24.까지 연 5%, 그다음 날부터 다 갚는 날까지 연 12%의 각 비율로 계산한 돈을, 원고 2에게 166,283,621원 및 그중 92,768,867원에 대하여 2020. 5. 29.부터, 73,514,754원에 대하여 2020. 11. 6.부터 각 2022. 6. 24.까지 연 5%, 그다음 날부터 다 갚는 날까지 연 12%의 각 비율로 계산한 돈을 초과하여 지급을 명한 피고 패소 부분을 파기하고, 그에 해당하는 원고들의 청구를 각 기각한다. 2. 나머지 상고를 모두 기각한다. 3. 소송총비용 중 3%는 원고들이, 나머지는 피고가 부담한다.
Unofficial English translation
1. The portion of the judgment of the court below, adverse to the defendant, ordering the defendant to pay to the plaintiff 1 an amount in excess of KRW 109,994,646, and, on KRW 89,289,009 thereof from May 29, 2020, and on KRW 20,705,637 thereof from November 6, 2020, respectively until June 24, 2022 at the rate of 5% per annum, and from the day following thereafter until full payment at the rate of 12% per annum, and to pay to the plaintiff 2 an amount in excess of KRW 166,283,621, and, on KRW 92,768,867 thereof from May 29, 2020, and on KRW 73,514,754 thereof from November 6, 2020, respectively until June 24, 2022 at the rate of 5% per annum, and from the day following thereafter until full payment at the rate of 12% per annum, is reversed, and the corresponding claims of the plaintiffs are each dismissed. 2. All remaining final appeals are dismissed. 3. Of the total costs of litigation, 3% shall be borne by the plaintiffs and the remainder by the defendant.
Provisions referred to
[1] 구 석탄산업법(2021. 3. 9. 법률 제17919호로 개정되기 전의 것) 제39조의3 제1항 제4호, 구 석탄산업법 시행령(2000. 12. 29. 대통령령 제17055호로 개정되기 전의 것) 제41조 제4항 제5호 / [2] 구 석탄산업법(2021. 3. 9. 법률 제17919호로 개정되기 전의 것) 제39조의3 제1항 제4호, 구 석탄산업법 시행령(2000. 12. 29. 대통령령 제17055호로 개정되기 전의 것) 제41조 제4항 제5호 / [3] 구 석탄산업법 시행령(2000. 12. 29. 대통령령 제17055호로 개정되기 전의 것) 제41조 제4항 제5호, 산업재해보상보험법 제51조 제1항, 제60조 제2항, 산업재해보상보험법 시행령 제58조 제3항 제2호
Read 2026-10-24 · Cross-read 2026-10-24. All quotes matched against the official text. The Chinese-character placeholders the court used for anonymised parties are given in their Korean readings, and parenthetical Chinese-character glosses are omitted.
Every entry is published only after all quotes have been matched character by character against the official text, and audited by an independent second reading from a different model family across all eight axes. Both agreed axes and text-grounded interpretive divergences are recorded openly. The ledger is a research record, not an assessment of the court or advice on any matter.
Back to the ledger