1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is an event held by the business owner D branch of the Gwangju Business Team D (hereinafter “this case’s business establishment”) in the Hockn beverage, Co., Ltd., the business owner’s workplace of the deceased, which is the Plaintiff’s spouse, and, even if not, a scarbing beach mountain is an event, a natural one out of the day of the camping.

In addition, since there is a fact that the deceased obtained the seaside book at the same place in the previous year, it cannot be deemed that the deceased's acquisition without an excessive warning is an unforeseeable or unexpected in light of social norms.

Therefore, an accident that the deceased went into the sea (hereinafter “instant accident”) falls under an occupational accident, and thus, the instant disposition should be revoked.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. In the event that an employee of the relevant legal doctrine is suffering from an accident while participating in an event or a meeting other than a company that is not provided for as an ordinary duty under an employment contract, if he/she intends 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, forcedness, method of operation, burden of expenses, etc. of the event or meeting, and the employee must not deviate from the usual course of the event or meeting.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2007Du6717 Decided November 15, 2007, etc.). B.

In light of the above legal principles, if the following facts or circumstances acknowledged by the purport of Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 7, Eul's evidence Nos. 1 through 5 and the entire arguments are examined, the causal relationship between the accident of this case and the deceased's work is not acknowledged, and thus, it cannot be viewed as occupational accident.

(1) The employees of the instant workplace are scheduled on October 23, 2015.