The Research On Judicial Judgment Of Karoshi’s Identification Of Work-Related Injury

In recent years,China has been in a period of transition from rapid economic growth to slow development.In order to reduce costs,many companies have implemented a performance appraisal system,prompting workers to work excessive overtime due to the situation.At present,the "996" work system has become the norm,and the work pressure of workers is huge,which greatly threatens the health and even lives of workers.However,it is a pity that in our country’s realistic judicial judgment cases,there are still serious differences in whether the "karoshi" can be identified as a work-related injury,and the results of similar cases are completely different.The current work-related injury insurance legislation cannot cover disputes arising from "karoshi" in practice.Therefore,this article intends to explore the feasibility of identifying work-related injuries in China from the perspective of "karoshi".In addition to the introduction,this article is divided into four parts,namely the related concepts and legal nature of "karoshi",the status quo of judicial adjudication for work-related injuries recognized by "karoshi" in China,and legislation from the perspective of judicial adjudication for work-related injuries recognized by "karoshi" in China Review and explore China’s legislation on the identification of work-related injuries in "karoshi".The first part discusses the concepts of "overwork" and "karoshi" and the legal nature of "karoshi".This article defines “overwork” from a unified subjective and objective perspective,and on this basis defines “karoshi” as the employer’s violation of relevant laws and regulations,requiring workers to work overtime and over-intensity,causing workers’ subjective mental fatigue and sudden stress.Circumstances of death from physical illness.The second part uses PKULAW database as the case search source,and searches on PKULAW with "karoshi" as the key word,and selects 32 administrative case cases as research samples to find China’s "karoshi" work-related injury judgment judicature Judging issues,such as the unclear definition of "working hours and job positions",and the unreasonable "48-hour" time limit.The third part is a legislative review from the perspective of the judicial adjudication of work-related injuries in China’s "death from overwork".That is,on the basis of the second part,it analyzes the problems of judicial adjudication in our country.This is due to the fact that the current legislation does not explicitly include "death from overwork".Within the scope of work-related injury insurance,the“48-hour” time limit is unreasonable,the “working hours” and “work positions” are improperly prescribed,the “reason for work” element is missing,and the definition of“emergency disease” is vague.Finally,on the basis of legislative review,combined with the basic theories of work-related injury identification,and learning from the legislative experience of Japan and the United States,we will explore the future of China’s legislation for“karoshi” identifying work-related injuries,and analyze the feasibility of identifying work-related injuries by “karoshi” in our country.Put forward specific legislative suggestions on including "karoshi" into the scope of work-related injuries,amending relevant legislation and clarifying the allocation of burden of proof.