[1] The method of determining whether an event or a meeting held by the company under the overall control and management of the employer is terminated

[2] The case holding that, in case where an employee who attended a meeting of the company's meeting and a meeting of the company was on the line of a meeting because he was on the part of the company's extension since he temporarily left the meeting due to the fact that he was on the line of a meeting since he was not on the part of the company's extension since he was on the part of the company's meeting since he was on the part of the company's meeting and returned home to the place of the second meeting after completing the business's calculation and she went out of the singing room to find the fee and died after he was used on the sing room, the deceased was on the part of the company's accident

[1] Articles 1 and 4 subparag. 1 (see current Article 5 subparag. 1) of the former Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act (amended by Act No. 8373 of Apr. 11, 2007) / [2] Articles 1 and 4 subparag. 1 (see current Article 5 subparag. 1) of the former Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act (amended by Act No. 8373 of Apr. 11, 2007)

Plaintiff (Attorney Han-soo et al., Counsel for plaintiff-appellee)

Korea Labor Welfare Corporation

Seoul High Court Decision 2007Nu32442 decided May 9, 2008

The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

In full view of the evidence adopted by the court below, the non-party 1 (hereinafter referred to as "the deceased") was at the time of non-party 2's operation, and the non-party 2 was at the time of non-party 3's operation, and the non-party 1 was at the time of non-party 4's operation, and the non-party 2 was at the time of non-party 1's operation, and the non-party 3 was at the time of non-party 5's operation, and the non-party 1 was at the time of non-party 4's operation, and the non-party 2 was at the time of non-party 1's operation, and the non-party 3 and the non-party 5's non-party 4's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 6's non-party 1's non-party 2's non-party 6's non-party 2's non-party 2's non-party 6's non-party 2's non-party 2's non-party 2'.

In light of the circumstances such as the organizer, purpose, contents, number of participants, method of operation, burden of expenses, etc. of an event or a meeting held under the overall control and management of the company, if it is recognized that the overall process of the event or meeting is in a state of being controlled or managed by the employer, and that the worker does not deviate from the net course of the event or meeting, it can be recognized as an occupational accident (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 97Nu7271, Aug. 29, 1997; 2007Du6717, Nov. 15, 2007). Thus, if the issue is whether the event or meeting held under the overall control and management of the company is completed, it shall be determined reasonably by taking into account some of the circumstances, that the overall process of the event or meeting is in a state of being controlled or managed by the employer, and that it shall not reasonably change the worker's purpose of compensation under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2007Du6710.

However, according to the facts and records found by the court below and the first instance court, the deceased and the non-party 5 were found to have been in a particularly large condition at the time of the second instance in singing, and the business owner considered the deceased to sit in the side of the deceased. In the above singinging room, the business owner ordered 10 cans of alcohol without any alcohol, and the sing room of the above sing room, and the sing room of the sing room were found to have become the next customers, and the fact that the business owner and the non-party 5, after the business owner returned home, did not have any circumstances to deem that the deceased and the non-party 5 ordered additional liquors and attempted to sing or calculated expenses.

In light of the above facts, it is difficult to view that there was a separate meeting or entertainment between the deceased and the non-party 50 minutes after the business owner returned home for about 2 hours from the beginning of the second ceremony, and it is difficult to view that there was a separate meeting or entertainment between the deceased and the non-party 50 minutes after the business owner had been staying in the singing room. However, it can be deemed that the deceased et al. had finished a meeting which was held and calculated under the supervision of the business owner, and the non-party 1 and the non-party 5 before the middle. The fact that the deceased et al., who were in the state of exploitation, left first before the business owner et al. did not come out of the first place, and the fact that the deceased et al. were found to have come out of the middle due to their personal reasons is also nothing more than that of the non-party 1 and the non-party 5 who had been in the first place after the business owner's participation in the meeting, and it is difficult to view that there was a separate reason for the deceased's participation in the operation and management.

Nevertheless, the court below held that the act of the deceased et al. at the time of returning home was merely a private and discretionary group after the completion of the official hall, and that the accident in this circumstance is not an occupational accident, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by misapprehending the legal principles on occupational accidents.

The ground of appeal pointing this out is with merit.

Therefore, without further proceeding to decide on the remaining grounds of appeal, the lower judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Cha Han-sung (Presiding Justice)