Court: "In-house Club Alcohol Snorkeling Death Not a Work-Related Accident"

[Asia Economy Reporter Seongpil Cho] A court ruling has determined that a worker who died in an accident while drinking and snorkeling during a company club activity cannot be recognized as a work-related injury. The court found that the club activities were not conducted under the employer's instructions or management, thus there was no controlling relationship.

According to the legal community on the 12th, the Seoul Administrative Court, Administrative Division 7 (Chief Judge Gukhyeon Kim) ruled against the plaintiff in a lawsuit filed by the wife of Mr. A, who died during a company club activity, against the Korea Workers' Compensation and Welfare Service seeking cancellation of the denial of survivor benefits and funeral expenses. Earlier, Mr. A died by drowning while snorkeling in a region of Gangwon Province in August 2018. Blood test results showed that Mr. A's blood alcohol concentration at the time of death was 0.086%, which corresponds to a state of intoxication warranting license cancellation under the Road Traffic Act.

Mr. A’s wife argued that "since the company supported activity expenses and provided vehicles, the club activities were under the employer’s control and management." Although the company club activities that caused Mr. A’s accident were not work under the employment contract, she claimed that since the gatherings were clearly under company control, it should be considered a work-related injury.

The court judged that there was no illegality in the Korea Workers' Compensation and Welfare Service's decision rejecting such claims. The court stated, "There were no instructions from the employer regarding the club activities, nor was there a need for reporting or approval procedures," and "joining or participating in the club was based on the employees' autonomous decisions." Regarding the company’s support of activity expenses and provision of vehicles, the court ruled, "This cannot be considered related to work." The testimony of witness Mr. B, who participated in the club activities with Mr. A, that "the support for club expenses and vehicles was a welfare benefit related to hobby activities," served as a basis for this judgment.

The court found that Mr. A’s negligence was the direct cause of the accident. The court pointed out, "Mr. A and others consumed alcohol during breaks and lunch and were snorkeling near a deep breakwater when the accident occurred," and "at the time, they were only wearing goggles and snorkels and did not wear other equipment such as fins."