Hello, this is attorney Jonghha Choi from Cheongchul Law Firm.

Year-end dinners, regular workshops, and employee athletic events are some of the most ambiguous gatherings where work and private life meet. Although these are not strictly business activities, employees attend them precisely because of their employment status. When someone is injured at such an event, can it be recognized as an industrial accident?

Korean courts have applied two core criteria in these cases: whether the event was under the employer's control and management, and whether the accident arose from a risk inherent in the event itself. The judgment is far from simple, because the conclusion can change between the first and second round of a dinner, or depending on whether attendance at a workshop was mandatory.

1. Events Under Employer Control and Management — Five Factors

The Supreme Court holds that whether an event was under the employer's control and management is judged comprehensively by social norms, considering the organizer, purpose, content, scope of participants, mandatoriness, operating method, and party bearing the costs (Supreme Court Decision 2008Du12283, October 23, 2008).

The above case involved a club within a Korea Railroad Corporation crew office that decided to hold an "Accident-Free Prayer Ceremony" during working hours. The office director approved the event plan, encouraged participation, and provided partial funding. When the club president fell to his death while putting up a banner in preparation for the event, the Supreme Court held that the event as a whole was under the employer's control and management, and that preparing for the event was part of operating the event itself, thereby qualifying as an industrial accident. The ruling clarified that even if an event is formally a club activity, industrial accident protection extends to it when the employer substantially organizes and manages it.

2. Company Dinners — From the First Round to the Second, and Returning Home

The most frequently disputed issue in dinner accidents is "where does the dinner end and private conduct begin."

The Supreme Court held that an industrial accident applied where, after a customary year-end dinner, the gathering continued at a hostess bar for a second round, and an employee was injured falling down the stairs of the building (Supreme Court Decision 2016Du54589, May 30, 2017). The Court reasoned that the second round could not be deemed merely a private gathering, considering that costs were paid by corporate card, the year-end dinner custom and practice, and the fact that the youngest, lowest-ranking attendee would have found it difficult to refuse.

However, not every dinner accident is recognized as an industrial accident. In one case, although the dinner was paid for by corporate card, the highest-ranking employee voluntarily drank far beyond his usual capacity, and the accident occurred at a point on an abnormal travel route rather than the usual route home. The court denied proximate causation between the dinner and the accident, refusing industrial accident status (Daejeon High Court Decision 2017Nu10676, August 10, 2017). Even with the outward form of a dinner, voluntary excessive drinking can take the case outside protective coverage.

3. Workshops and Athletic Events — Mandatoriness and Degree of Employer Involvement

Similar standards apply to accidents at non-alcohol-related events such as workshops and athletic events. In one case, an athletic event held with headquarters' approval and financial support resulted in an employee tearing his Achilles tendon during footvolley practice two days before the event, with subsequent complications leading to death. The court recognized this as an industrial accident, citing the necessity of personnel management and the fact that the practice was part of event preparation (Seoul High Court (Chuncheon) Decision 2020Nu126, January 18, 2021).

By contrast, even an event labeled a "workshop" can yield a different conclusion. The Supreme Court denied industrial accident status to a workshop nominally held to promote team unity and sales force motivation, but actually conducted primarily as a skiing trip, where some employees did not attend without disadvantage and even retirees joined, making it difficult to view participation as mandatory by reason of employment, and where costs were funded not through internal corporate approval but from a performance bonus reserve (Supreme Court Decision 2006Du19150, March 29, 2007).

Company dinners, workshops, and athletic events are tools of personnel management for employers and de facto extensions of work for employees. Employers should clearly set, from the planning stage, the form of participation (mandatory or voluntary), source of funding, and work-related nature of the schedule, and recognize that responsibility for ending alcohol-related dinners at appropriate levels lies with them. Only then can the scope of liability be assessed if an accident occurs, and more importantly, accidents themselves can be reduced.