1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. From July 4, 2016, the Plaintiff’s father (D students, hereinafter “the deceased”) performed the duties of delivery of food, etc. in F, a Chinese restaurant located in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E (hereinafter “instant business establishment”).

Although the representative of the instant workplace was G (hereinafter “business owner”), H, the spouse of the business owner, was mainly managing the instant workplace.

B. The instant business establishment had a total of 13 delivery clocks, all of which were registered in the name of H, and all of which were registered in the name of H, and each of the above Orala premium, oil cost, and repair cost was borne by the business owner.

The business owner allowed the deceased to get to and from work by using the dial part for delivery.

C. On July 18, 2016, at around 00:05, the Deceased returned to the delivery c.i.e., a cruise car, as the airport of Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, in breach of the signal to red signal from 163 Mr.e., the deceased left the right side of the cruise car with green signal by negligence in breach of the signal to red signal.

(hereinafter “instant traffic accident”). D.

After the instant traffic accident, the Deceased transferred to an I Hospital by the 119 Emergency Rescue Team, but died at around 03:06 on July 18, 2016.

E. On October 14, 2016, the Plaintiff filed a claim for the payment of bereaved family’s benefits and funeral expenses with the Defendant. On October 25, 2016, the Defendant rendered a decision on the payment of bereaved family’s benefits and funeral expenses, on the ground that the Defendant, attending a drinking place, other than the event recognized under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act (type of event recognized under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act), did so for more than 30 minutes at a personal meeting, and moved the place from a drinking state to a high speed after taking the place into consideration with the employer, and cannot be recognized as a occupational accident even if he/she died due to a violation of signal, as a legal doctrine on commuting accidents.

(f) The Plaintiff is dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed a petition for review with the Defendant on January 6, 2017 under 2017-299, but the Defendant was the deceased on April 17, 2017.