1. The plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On November 26, 2012, the Plaintiffs’ ASEAN (hereinafter “the deceased”) joined the Korea Railroad Corporation as a service personnel, and served as the contractual officer of the management support center as D in March 30, 2015, from March 30, 2015.

B. On June 24, 2015, the Deceased took a ceremony with the employees of the department to which he belongs, and around 23:42 of the same day, driving his own car with the central line, driving a two-lane road in front of the F hotel located in Daejeon Sung-gu E, Daejeon, while driving a two-lane road. The Deceased was completely receiving the front of the cross-city bus running on a one-lane road (hereinafter “instant accident”) and died due to ordinary damage.

C. On August 28, 2015, the Plaintiffs claimed for the payment of survivors’ benefits and funeral expenses to the Defendant.

On September 16, 2015, the Defendant rendered a decision to refuse the payment of bereaved family benefits and funeral expenses to the Plaintiffs on the ground that “the traffic accident occurred while driving a vehicle under the influence of alcohol 0.264% under the influence of alcohol by the business owner cannot be deemed an occupational accident under the control and management of the business owner,” on the ground that “the driver did not have the prior approval of the user for the time of the instant accident.” The Defendant decided to refuse the payment of bereaved family benefits and funeral expenses to the Plaintiffs on the ground that “any traffic accident that occurred while driving a vehicle under the influence of alcohol 0.264% cannot be deemed an occupational accident under

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). 【No dispute exists, Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 through 5, Eul’s evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion was planned under the direction of Chapter D with the aim of leading up to the scheduled assignment of personnel of the president, who is the head of the department to which the Deceased belongs, and dividing the situation between the employees in the contracting office and the stone. At the same time, the Plaintiffs’ assertion was planned under the direction of Chapter D for the purpose of encouraging the employees in the contracting office and forming a business relationship among them.

The deceased will faithfully attend the meeting within the ordinary workplace as an employee of the department to which he belongs.