1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The reasons for the court's explanation concerning this case is that the court of the first instance admitted the "G" of the fourth sentence of the judgment of the first instance as "K", and the fourth and third sentence of the third sentence of the first instance (hereinafter "the first sentence") and the fourth and sixth (hereinafter "the fourth sentence") took place after "the second sentence of the second sentence of the first instance."

The following cannot be deemed to fall under the first sentence of the fifth part (hereinafter referred to as “second round”).

Then, even if the instant accident was an ordinary accident under the control and management of the employer, it is difficult to recognize a proximate causal relationship between the business and the accident, as seen thereafter.

“Along with the use of 3 to 15 pages 5 as described in Paragraph 2, it shall be as stated in the reasoning of the first instance judgment. As such, it shall be cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Parts to be dried;

C. Whether it can be seen as an occupational accident that occurred during the ordinary process of an employee’s participation in an event or a meeting, other than a company that is not defined as one obligated to ordinarily engage in an employment contract, in order to recognize it as an occupational accident, the overall process of the event or meeting must first be in the state of being controlled or managed by the employer in light of the circumstances such as the organizer, purpose, content, number of participants, the method of operation, burden of expenses, etc. of the event or meeting, and the worker must not deviate from the usual course of the event or meeting (see Supreme Court Decision 2007Du6717, Nov. 15, 2007). If there is proximate causal relation between the work and the accident even in the event of an injury, disease, or disability, and the accident, as the primary cause for the employee’s drinking in excess of his/her liquor is caused by the employer’s control or management (see Supreme Court Decision 207Du6717, Nov. 15, 2007).