[Representation] Administration

Barun Law Overturns the District Court’s Denial of a Site Supervisor’s Worker Status on Appeal, Leading to the Annulment of a Denial of Workers’ Compensation Benefits

Case Overview

The plaintiff suffered a severe injury from a fall while installing temporary structures at a construction site in October 2022. The plaintiff applied for workers’ compensation benefits from the Korea Workers’ Compensation & Welfare Service (the defendant), claiming that the accident constituted an occupational injury. However, the defendant denied the request, stating:

“The plaintiff, as a ‘site supervisor’ (??, ‘sip-jang’) at the construction site, led multiple workers while operating independently under their own financial and managerial discretion, and thus cannot be considered a worker eligible for industrial accident compensation.”

The plaintiff challenged this decision by filing a lawsuit, but the first-instance court ruled in favor of the defendant. At the appellate stage, we represented the plaintiff.

Key Issues and Our Role

At construction sites, specialized workers often form teams to undertake specific tasks. The most experienced worker typically acts as the ‘site supervisor’. This is a long-standing practice in Korea, where the contracts signed by site supervisors—often referred to as ‘work unit contracts’ (?????, ‘pum-ttegi-gye-yak’)—are recognized in legal precedent as a mix of employment and subcontracting agreements.

Due to the hybrid nature of these contracts, a legal question arose as to whether a site supervisor qualifies as a ‘worker’ under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act and the Labor Standards Act. A site supervisor operates with both independent and subordinate aspects in relation to the employer.

Barun gathered extensive evidence by investigating:

(a) Who bore the cost of materials,

(b) Who exercised direct supervision and control at the construction site, and

(c) How the compensation for labor was determined.

Through a comprehensive review of records, testimonies from subcontractors, and detailed legal arguments, we successfully demonstrated that the plaintiff provided labor under a dependent employment relationship in exchange for wages.

Court’s Ruling and Significance

The Seoul High Court fully accepted our arguments, overturned the first-instance ruling, and annulled the defendant’s denial of benefits. Since the defendant did not appeal, the ruling became final.

This decision clarified that even in construction sites where site supervisors work under ‘work unit contracts,’ they can still be recognized as workers based on the substantive nature of their employment relationship. The court deemed the plaintiff’s business registration status as a sole proprietor to be a mere formality. Ultimately, proving worker status depends on reconstructing the factual circumstances of the workplace in detail, and thanks to our efforts, the plaintiff, despite losing in the first trial, won on appeal and was able to receive workers' compensation benefits.

□? Attorneys in charge: Kim Hyun-Woong, Noh Man-Kyeong, Jeon Ji-Hye and Lee Kyu-Won

?Attorney Kim, Hyun Woong's profile

?Attorney Noh, Man Kyeong's profile

?Attorney Jeon, Ji Hye's profile

?Attorney Lee, Kyu Won's profile