1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On December 18, 2014, the Plaintiff was employed by the Korea Tourism Corporation (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) and filed an application for medical care benefits with the Defendant on January 23, 2015, after receiving the diagnosis of the “sacriffying of the right part” (hereinafter “the instant accident”), the Plaintiff sacriffed the snow on the steel board (the top lid) installed on the road on which the house was located for the purpose of performing the occupation-building construction around 12:0 on December 18, 2014, when he was performing the U.S. dollars duties of the wooden-si Building (hereinafter “instant building”).

B. On February 12, 2015, the Defendant rendered a disposition of non-approval for medical care (hereinafter “instant disposition”) against the Plaintiff on the ground that the instant accident occurred during recess hours and cannot be deemed to be under the control and management of the employer.

[Reasons for Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, Gap evidence 1 to 7, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. Since the plaintiff's assertion does not exist within the non-party company's cafeteria in the building of this case, the chief of the management office stated that "it is included in the non-party company's cafeteria, which may go to the house and bring about or choose an urban village as it is located in the house," and accordingly, the accident of this case occurred while the plaintiff was located at the house for the occupation of the plaintiff, which was under the control and management of the business owner.

The instant disposition based on a different premise is unlawful.

B. (i) Since free action is permitted to an employee during recess, it cannot be said that an ordinary employee is under the control and management of the employer. Therefore, if an employee is injured while doing any act using a facility within the workplace during recess hours, it cannot be said that the employee is an occupational accident. Meanwhile, the employee’s act during recess hours is not an occupational accident.